2 ms·
I have seen much of these problems with Scrum, as well. Redefining "complete" so we can book the points, but actually finish it in the next sprint is very, very
by icedchai 5y ago
I have seen much of these problems with Scrum, as well. Redefining "complete" so we can book the points, but actually finish it in the next sprint is very, very common. Finishing early, starting on a future story, but the scrum master asking you to not bring that story into the current sprint, in case you don't finish it, is also a frequent occurrence. My view is "if I don't finish it, it rolls over, so who cares", but this is frowned upon since it throws off the reports.
- sharken 5y agoIt's the same issue with SAFe, with the added cost of many additional meetings that provide little value. Redefining "complete" or letting a story roll over, e.g. the estimate for finishing it was wrong, seems to indicate something doesn't work as it should. Breaking down a project into milestones sounds like a great idea, i totally agree that project management could use an alternative.
- icedchai 5y agoAll the overhead that occurs with Scrum / SAFe / Agile in general is absolutely terrible. Daily standups? Sprint planning? Retrospectives? Grooming meetings? Then there are additional, generally agenda-less team meetings on top of it. All these meetings, plus time lost to context switching, etc., probably adds up to 20 or 25% of the time.