Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland have just announced the new version of the Scrum Guide! The only change is the addition of two paragraphs about the five Scrum values:
When the values of commitment, courage, focus, openness and respect are embodied and lived by the Scrum Team, the Scrum pillars of transparency, inspection, and adaptation come to life and builds trust for everyone. The Scrum Team members learn and explore those values as they work with the Scrum events, roles and artifacts.
Successful use of Scrum depends on people becoming more proficient in living these five values. People personally commit to achieving the goals of the Scrum Team. The Scrum Team members have courage to do the right thing and work on tough problems. Everyone focuses on the work of the Sprint and the goals of the Scrum Team. The Scrum Team and its stakeholders agree to be open about all the work and the challenges with performing the work. Scrum Team members respect each other to be capable, independent people.
The Scrum Guide is the sole and official definition of Scrum.
Regular big up-front planning is not necessary with Scrum. Instead, a team can just get started and use constant feedback in the Sprint Review to adjust it’s plans. Even the Product Backlog can be created after the first Sprint has started. All that is really necessary to get started is a Scrum Team, a product vision, and a decision on Sprint length. In this extreme case, the Scrum Team itself would decide what to build in its first Sprint and use the time of the Sprint to also prepare some initial Product Backlog Items. Then, the first Sprint Review would allow stakeholders to provide feedback and further develop the Product Backlog. The empirical nature of Scrum could even allow the Product Owner to emerge from the business stakeholders, rather than being assigned to the team right from the start.
Starting a Sprint without a Product Backlog is not easy, but it can be done. The team has to know at least a little about the business, and there should be some (possibly informal) project or product charter that they are aware of. The team uses this super basic information and decides on their own what to build in their first Sprint. Again, the focus should be on getting something that can be demoed (and potentially shippable). The team is likely to build some good stuff and some things that are completely wrong… but the point is to get the Inspect and Adapt cycle started as quickly as possible. Which means of course that they need to have stakeholders (customers, users) actually attend the demo at the end of the Sprint. The Product Owner may or may not even be involved in this first Sprint.
One important reason this is sometimes a good approach is the culture of “analysis paralysis” that exists in some organizations. In this situation, an organization is unable to do anything because they are so concerned about getting things right. Scrum is a framework for inspect and adapt and that can (and does) include the Product Backlog. Is it better for a team to sit idle while someone tries to do sufficient preparation? Or is it better to get started and inspect and adapt? This is actually a philosophical question (as well as a practical question). The mindset and philosophy of the Agile Manifesto and Scrum is that trying to produce valuable software is more important that documentation… that individuals and how they work together is more important than rigidly following a process or tool. I will agree that in many cases it is acceptable to do some up-front work, but it should be minimized, particularly when it is preventing people from starting to deliver value. The case of a team getting started without a product backlog is rare… but it can be a great way for a team to help an organization overcome analysis paralysis.
The Agile Manifesto is very clear: “The BEST architectures, requirements and designs emerge out of self-organizing teams.” [Emphasis added.]
Hugely memorable for me is the story that Ken Schwaber told in the CSM course that I took from him in 2003. This is a paraphrase of that story:
I [Ken Schwaber] was talking to the CIO of a large IT organization. The CIO told me that his projects last twelve to eighteen months and at the end, he doesn’t get what he needs. I told him, “Scrum can give you what you don’t need in a month.”
I experienced this myself in a profound way just a couple years into my career as an Agile coach and trainer. I was working with a department of a large technology organization. They had over one hundred people who had been working on Agile pilot projects. The department was responsible for a major product and executive management had approved a complete re-write. The product managers and Product Owners had done a lot of work to prepare a product backlog (about 400 items!) that represented all the existing functionality of the product that needed to be re-written. But, the big question, “what new technology platform do we use for the re-write?” had not yet been resolved. The small team of architects were tasked with making this decision. But they got stuck. They got stuck for three months. Finally, the director of the department, who had learned to trust my advice in other circumstances, asked me, “does Scrum have any techniques for making these kind of architectural decisions?”
I said, “yes, but you probably won’t like what Scrum recommends!”
She said, “actually, we’re pretty desperate. I’ve got over a hundred people effectively sitting idle for the last three months. What does Scrum recommend?”
“Just start. Let the teams figure out the platform as they try to implement functionality.”
She thought for a few seconds. Finally she said, “okay. Come by this Monday and help me launch our first Sprint.”
The amazing thing was that the teams didn’t lynch me when on Monday she announced that “our Agile consultant says we don’t need to know our platform in order to get started.”
The first Sprint (two weeks long) was pretty chaotic. But, with some coaching and active support of management, they actually delivered a working increment of their product. And decided on the platform to use for the rest of the two-year project.
You must trust your team.
If your organization is spending more than a few days preparing for the start of a project, it is probably suffering from this pitfall. This is the source of great waste and lost opportunity. Use Scrum to rapidly converge on the correct solutions to your business problems instead of wasting person-years of time on analysis and planning. We can help with training and coaching to give you the tools to start fast using Scrum and to fix your Scrum implementation.
My heartfelt congratulations on this important and historic event! Scrum is one, again!
From the official announcement issued by Scrum Alliance:
SCRUM ORGANIZATIONS ANNOUNCE OFFICIAL
COLLABORATIVE ADOPTION OF SCRUM GUIDE
Scrum Alliance, Scrum.org, and Scrum Inc. announce the release and joint endorsement of a new community website, ScrumGuides.org. The new website is the official source of “The Scrum Guide, The Definitive Guide to Scrum: The Rules of the Game.”
Dr. Jeff Sutherland and Ken Schwaber created Scrum and authored “The Scrum Guide” to ensure Scrum remains true to its core principles and values.
“The Scrum Guide is the canonical definition of Scrum. Ken and I have worked closely together for decades to keep it simple, clear, and, in the true spirit of Scrum, to include only what is absolutely necessary,” says Sutherland, CEO of Scrum Inc. “Scrum is a powerful tool to radically increase productivity. Every implementation of Scrum is different, as teams and organizations apply it within their context, but the fundamental framework always remains the same. For Scrum Alliance, Scrum.org, and Scrum Inc. to come together to recognize the central place the Scrum Guide holds will provide clarity to the hundreds of thousands of Scrum practitioners across the planet.”
The explosive growth of people and organizations using Scrum in recent years has led to some market confusion as to the precise definition of Scrum. The preeminent certifying bodies, Scrum Alliance and Scrum.org, coming together in support of a common definition of Scrum is a win for Scrum practitioners around the world.
“The pieces of Scrum are carefully fit to each other to yield the best possible results. This has taken years for Jeff and myself to achieve. Watch for new versions as we continue to refine,” said Ken Schwaber, founder of Scrum.org.
“It’s time for convergence in the Scrum community,” said Scrum.org’s operations chief David Starr. “Giving this clear explanation of Scrum clarifies the framework for the entire industry. We are pleased to support a shared and unambiguous source of truth defined by Scrum’s creators.”
Carol McEwan, Scrum Alliance Managing Director, said, “This makes the most sense for the Scrum community. The Scrum Guide is based on the principles on which Scrum was founded. It offers Scrum practitioners worldwide a common standard and understanding of the foundations of Scrum. This collaboration adds real value and can only benefit everyone practicing, or considering practicing, Scrum.”
If you change the Scrum framework you just simply aren’t using Scrum and are probably canceling some of its most important benefits.
Thank you Ken! I wholeheartedly agree. Every CSM class I teach, I emphasize the complete nature of Scrum as a single tool, not a collection of tools. Learning Scrum is about learning the tool, not learning how to pick and choose pieces of a tool. Let’s explore this metaphor of Scrum as a tool.
Consider a hammer. A hammer is ideally suited for pounding nails into wood. It has two parts: a head and a handle. If you take the parts and use them separately, they can still be used for pounding nails into wood… but they are very ineffective compared to the hammer (although better than using your bare fist). It is non-sensical to decompose the hammer and try to use the pieces separately. However, a hammer is not suited to other purposes such as driving screws or cutting wood. It’s perfection is not just in its form, but also in its proper application. A hammer works through a balanced combination of leverage and momentum.
Scrum is like a hammer. It has parts (daily Scrum, Sprints, ScrumMaster, etc.), but taking the parts and trying to use them separately is… you guessed it… non-sensical. The parts of Scrum combine to be an extremely effective tool for new product development. Just like a hammer, there are things you wouldn’t want to do with Scrum such as manufacturing or painting a wall. (We might not all agree on the limits of the use of Scrum… that’s something for another article.) Scrum works through a combination of pressure on the organization and “inspect and adapt” (continuous improvement).
Please. Don’t modify Scrum. If you must change things about Scrum, please stop calling it Scrum.
PLEASE NOTE: these are my own notes based on the presentation – any errors or omissions are my own.
TOPIC: Treat People as Adults
– “we need to X first”… e.g. X=architecture
– – this is a parent-child approach – need to tell someone how to do something
– – does this mean we are not adults?
– – only through direction and planning will we do intelligent things
– Story from “Scrum in the Enterprise” about a “team” of 17 people
– vs. treating people as “resources”
– — banter —
– “Maverick” book
TOPIC: Teach “ask the team” by actually asking the team (in the class).
– teaching by example! Using the adults in the class to help answer the question
EDITOR’S NOTE: okay. this is very interesting, but I’m having so much trouble hearing that I’m going to bail on this one. Instead, I believe that Mike Vizdos at implementingscrum.com is also blogging this session. I’m sure his notes will be up soon 🙂
AGILE Project Management with Scrum -A book by Ken Schwaber
Prior to the Certified ScrumMaster seminar I attended in August 2008, I read the book by Ken Schwaber called Agile Project Management with Scrum based on a recommendation from Mishkin Berteig. After attending the seminar and becoming certified as a ScrumMaster I re-read the book. The second reading was much more valuable than the first for I had a much better understanding of Scrum. Here are my comments on this book.
What have I learned?
1. The adoption of Scrum methodology is more about changing roles and behaviours than it is about embracing a new process.
It was obvious to me and to Ken that one of the greatest challenges facing those individuals when moving from a their current environment to a scrum environment was that they would need to change their behaviours. In the former environment the team member would be directed and inspected based on what their project manager told them to do. The PM is the boss and the team members are somewhat powerless. In Scrum the team members take responsibility for their commitments and communicate their accomplishments on a daily basis. The hardest change occurs when the project manager is asked to become a ScrumMaster. The project Manager is familiar with assigning tasks and personally inspecting results. In the scrum environment they are the servants of the team, removing obstacles and facilitating the process. As Ken states in this book some project managers have great difficulty transitioning into the ScrumMaster role. They are unwilling to give up the power and position as a project master. It is hard to move from the leader of the pack to become the sheep dog herding the sheep!
2. Scrum is unforgiving for if you do not apply the fundamental principles it is likely your efforts to adopt Scrum will fail.
As I reviewed the numerous case studies Ken chronicled is was apparent that when organizations, Team members, Product Owners and ScrumMasters followed the terms, conditions and guidelines of the Scrum methodology, they tended to deliver on their commitments. When they misunderstood, misused or deleted some portion of the methodology they tended not to accomplish their objectives. The methodology is well thought out and works in many situations when used appropriately.
3. Scrum enhances individual and team expertise.
I agree and totally support Ken’s opinion about the value of Scrum. I have no doubt the individual team member is empowered and has a greater sense of achievement. Obviously based on his case studies, Ken builds a strong case that Scrum allows the team to deliver quicker. The process is more change adaptive, responsive to customer needs, timely and economical than traditional methods. Greater energy and capacity is released in the team and individual team members.
I have been reading a book entitled “Agile Project Management with Scrum” by Ken Schwaber. It is an interesting read. The examples and stories that he shares of companies who have struggled with Scrum and those that have succeeded are fantastic. The way Schwaber breaks up the book and explains all the roles then gives example makes it a great learning tool. It is also really funny and clever.
One complaint I have with the book is that it is very technical, it seems that the reader is assumed to have many years of software development experience. It is interesting that the projects that Schwaber discusses that have the most trouble with Scrum are those that are “stuck” in their old ways of working. It’s almost as if the old saying of “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing” is true for Scrum implementations. “Scrum means doing things in small cycles – so I will do everything the same except in shorter cycles.” Anybody ever heard of that type of reasoning?
I definitely recommend this book for those who have considerable experience in the technology field. For those who don’t this book might be challenging at times, espcially with the computer language words that are used.
I want to continually learn for my own personal and professional growth. So IÂ would like to know which books do you suggest? Are there any books that share examples and stories that are not focused on software development? If you disagree which my review of the book please comment.
I’m working with a number of companies using agile methods that have between 10 and 20 teams all working on the same product/project/program. They didn’t start small. These aren’t cases of organically growing from one good agile team to many good agile teams. Rather, these are organizations that have grown up in a non-agile approach and now want to reap the benefits of agile with their many teams. What is interesting is that these organizations all have some common problems and then all have some unique problems. There isn’t an obvious prescription for how they should be doing their agile implementations. I hope to write a few articles about scaling agile and scrum, and this one is our starting point: what reading should you do if you find yourself in the situation of trying to build a large agile organization.
The notes in this entry include predictions from Ken Schwaber, a presentation from Bob Schatz formerly of Primavera on their enterprise-wide implementation of Scrum, a panel discussion with Tim Bacon, Jeff McKenna, and Diana Larsen, moderated by Esther Derby. In the afternoon we heard from Pete Deemer about Yahoo!’s enterprise adoption of Scrum, Mike Cohn about User Stories, and to close the day we had an energetic presentation from Tim Dorsey of WildCard Systems about their enterprise implementation of Scrum.