5 ms·
I’ve had good experience with actual Scrum, as described by The Scrum Guide (https://scrumguides.org/scrum-guide.html https://scrumguides.org/scrum-guide.html).
by alxmng 3y ago
I’ve had good experience with actual Scrum, as described by The Scrum Guide (https://scrumguides.org/scrum-guide.html https://scrumguides.org/scrum-guide.html).
I have had terrible experiences with bastard scrum: Standups as manager reports, sprints as death marches, stories without a definition of ready or done, stories added during the sprint, no backlog refinement, etc.
In my experience many companies doing “scrum” are actually doing daily manager reports and weekly top-down deadlines of fixed scope, while calling these “standup” and “sprints”.
In my 15-year career I’ve only worked with one company doing real Scrum, and all the companies doing bastard scrum were startups.
- simonhfrost 3y agoScrumbut: https://t2informatik.de/en/smartpedia/scrumbut/ https://t2informatik.de/en/smartpedia/scrumbut/
- alxmng 3y agoThanks! Good to know.
- moongloow 3y agoAs a practical matter, what was actually done differently at the place where it worked?
- alxmng 3y agoI’d say the biggest difference was: 1) A product owner that articulated clear and granular user stories with acceptance criteria, and kept them prioritized. Sprint planning was quick and easy as a result, and developers had freedom to design and implement the story within those constraints. 2) A good engineering manager (scrum master) that insulated the team from pressure from product owner, and ensured product backlog was well articulated and sprint backlog was reasonable and practical. Both of these things are clearly described by The Scrum Guide and how scrum should work. This can be boiled down to trust: Is the company a high-trust environment where people are respected, or a low-trust environment where people are treated as machines. Sadly in my experience, most of this industry is the latter.