4 ms·
Until the early 90s you couldn't push updates for released software as easily as today, so software had to be launched with a high standard of quality. Then, a
by partycoder 10y ago
Until the early 90s you couldn't push updates for released software as easily as today, so software had to be launched with a high standard of quality.
Then, after the Internet became more ubiquitous the industry started pushing towards "minimum viable products" that get fixed over time, but can still make revenue. Usually keeping the product low profile with low to no marketing.
But after a couple of years, the agile enthusiasts took over and decided that everything should add "customer value", and everything else should be neglected. The Scrum proponents were also very inclusive, inviting non-technical people to become certified... and that's when things went south and the beginning of the low quality doctrine started.
As digital distribution starts becoming more popular, business people no longer wanted to keep a low profile launching a minimum viable product. Now they want to launch their prototype with full marketing and user acquisition.
Post-launch, software gets bloated with additional features nobody requires, rather than finally fixing long-standing bugs. In addition, developers get the blame for defects and if they want a solution they have to fix them on their own time.
Any non-engineer can become certified in Scrum, and that has had an impact in the way Scrum has been implemented. Suddenly, a certification involving 16 hours of training to pass a 35 question exam with 68% passing score is more important than an engineering degree. Then, the vast majority of people who criticize non-Scrum methodologies has not actually been curious enough to try them and form their own opinion. It is the herbalife of software.
A Scrum certification without a software engineering degree should not lead to a managerial position in software. You can hire the best engineers, but with mediocre leadership results will be mediocre.
It is time to acknowledge Scrum has been hijacked by greed and has produced a huge software quality crisis.
- nradov 10y agoScrum isn't the problem, there's no causative relationship. And I don't remember that older software being any higher quality than what we have today on a defects per function point basis.
- partycoder 10y agoWhat are the requirements for becoming a Certified Scrum Master? Do you think someone can professionally employ Scrum without having a background in software engineering without contributing to the problems I mentioned before? If Scrum isn't the problem, it's clearly not the solution either.
- heisenbit 10y agoPeople without any talent for management in management are the problem. Scrum certification is just one entry vector here. A Scrum specific problem is that it also attracts people who would otherwise not be attracted to management positions which adds to the load and a particular flavor of dysfunction. Yeah, I know Scrum Masters are not project managers but let's not go down that rabbit hole.
- nradov 10y agoAre you asking a rhetorical question? There are a variety of different organizations which certify Scrum Masters and they each have their own certification standards. But there are also many people working as Scrum Masters today who have no certification. No one ever claimed that Scrum is the solution but it does bring together a number of practices that have been found to usually work well for team software development. Some additional structure is usually needed for larger programs which go beyond what a single agile team can deliver. Scrum by itself has no real impact on release cycle times or quality. Find another whipping boy.
- partycoder 10y agoCertifying is a form of endorsement. Then, let me paste a claim from "Scrum Alliance", one of the top institutions granting these McCertifications: "A Certified ScrumMaster® helps project teams properly use Scrum, increasing the likelihood of the project's overall success. CSMs understand Scrum values, practices, and applications and provide a level of knowledge and expertise above and beyond that of typical project managers." How are you supposed to be "above and beyond" a project manager if the certification itself: - Has no training requirement - Has no experience requirement - Requires 16 hours, a ~30 question test over the Internet with a 66% passing score. As a result, you have someone who is supposedly capable of balancing a software engineering team requirements with stakeholders... after sixteen hours... Scrum has nice values but in practice, it is a get rich quick ponzi scheme. It is a telephone game that after person #100 is completely distorted from its original meaning.