3 ms·

This wasn't scrum because talking to the costumer is the primary job of the Product Owner and not of the Scrum Master. PO is also a full time job and not some s

by siva7 3y ago

This wasn't scrum because talking to the costumer is the primary job of the Product Owner and not of the Scrum Master. PO is also a full time job and not some side hustle of a team lead or SM. Having a good Product Owner makes the difference between adopting scrum successfully or failing at this process. Regarding why your team failed - i've been in a similiar scenario like you as a team lead. The answer is simple - no one in your team was open to adopting scrum so it failed. That's fine but it's not the fault of scrum rather than the company management.

lpapez 3y ago
> Regarding why your team failed - i've been in a similiar scenario like you as a team lead. The answer is simple - no one in your team was open to adopting scrum so it failed. That's fine but it's not the fault of scrum rather than the company management. How do you know no one was open to trying it? I specifically mentioned that I personally objected to scrum, but wrote nothing about other people. What happened in fact was that people initially really tried their best ti cooperate, but it simply didn't work very well and crippled the team.
lolinder 3y ago
I honestly can't tell, because you don't have a history of joke comments and didn't include a /s. Is this intentional parody, or did you miss OP's closing line? > Now I will just wait for someone to tell me that this wasn't real Scrum either, because we were supposed to have Product Owner talk to the client instead of Scrum Master :)
- sumtechguy 3y ago
  His point is not exactly invalid though? If you go into something with the intention of 'this sucks' and then do not even want to make it work would it not reason that it probably will fail? Scrum usually fails because people become enamored with the process instead of thinking about what that process is for. Layering on more and more of it because something is not working. Until you are busy with 40% of your time just managing scrum. Something in scrum not working throw it out. Do not double down and add more.
  - aidenn0 3y ago
    I can't tell if you are saying Scrum socks when people hate it or when people are enamored with it. I guess it will work if everybody is casually indifferent?
    - sumtechguy 3y ago
      Scrum sucks when people ignore why they are using it and decide to use it just because everyone else is. indifference is usually the root cause of broken scrum. No one speaking up and saying 'lets fix this'. Things piled on for no real reason but not thrown out when they are shown to just be in the way. Throw in a 'bad actor' and yeah it can really suck but then the whole job will anyway no matter what your process. No one really wants to work with a grumpy person. That is not the fault of scrum that is a organization/people problem.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    > if you go into something with the intention of 'this sucks' and then do not even want to make it work we can rephrase this as "the serum didn't work because you didn't have faith in it."
    - uhhhhhhh 3y ago
      Expanding on that, scrum is a religion. Like many/most religions, it requires faith, and that a lack of faith is singularly responsible for any failure of said belief/religion to deliver its promises.
      - freedomben 3y ago
        I agree completely about scrum being a religion and lack of faith and all that, and I can't stand the "but that wasn't real scrum" automatic response that most of the defenders make. But the GP point is valid. not every iteration can be blamed on "scrum" anymore than anything bad that happens in life can be blamed on Satan. If people want it to fail, they can make it fail. But that said, to slightly counter my own point: I think that demonstrates a weakness with Scrum. If people following the system (even malicous compliance) can make it fail, then the system is flawed. It obviously sucks for those people or they wouldn't have a bad attitude about it. For example, Scrum likes to pretend that all engineers are fungible, but this is clearly wrong and a big problem with the system.

by siva7 3y ago

lpapez 3y ago

> Regarding why your team failed - i've been in a similiar scenario like you as a team lead. The answer is simple - no one in your team was open to adopting scrum so it failed. That's fine but it's not the fault of scrum rather than the company management. How do you know no one was open to trying it? I specifically mentioned that I personally objected to scrum, but wrote nothing about other people. What happened in fact was that people initially really tried their best ti cooperate, but it simply didn't work very well and crippled the team.

lolinder 3y ago

I honestly can't tell, because you don't have a history of joke comments and didn't include a /s. Is this intentional parody, or did you miss OP's closing line? > Now I will just wait for someone to tell me that this wasn't real Scrum either, because we were supposed to have Product Owner talk to the client instead of Scrum Master :)

sumtechguy 3y ago
His point is not exactly invalid though? If you go into something with the intention of 'this sucks' and then do not even want to make it work would it not reason that it probably will fail? Scrum usually fails because people become enamored with the process instead of thinking about what that process is for. Layering on more and more of it because something is not working. Until you are busy with 40% of your time just managing scrum. Something in scrum not working throw it out. Do not double down and add more.
- aidenn0 3y ago
  I can't tell if you are saying Scrum socks when people hate it or when people are enamored with it. I guess it will work if everybody is casually indifferent?
  - sumtechguy 3y ago
    Scrum sucks when people ignore why they are using it and decide to use it just because everyone else is. indifference is usually the root cause of broken scrum. No one speaking up and saying 'lets fix this'. Things piled on for no real reason but not thrown out when they are shown to just be in the way. Throw in a 'bad actor' and yeah it can really suck but then the whole job will anyway no matter what your process. No one really wants to work with a grumpy person. That is not the fault of scrum that is a organization/people problem.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  > if you go into something with the intention of 'this sucks' and then do not even want to make it work we can rephrase this as "the serum didn't work because you didn't have faith in it."
  - uhhhhhhh 3y ago
    Expanding on that, scrum is a religion. Like many/most religions, it requires faith, and that a lack of faith is singularly responsible for any failure of said belief/religion to deliver its promises.
    - freedomben 3y ago
      I agree completely about scrum being a religion and lack of faith and all that, and I can't stand the "but that wasn't real scrum" automatic response that most of the defenders make. But the GP point is valid. not every iteration can be blamed on "scrum" anymore than anything bad that happens in life can be blamed on Satan. If people want it to fail, they can make it fail. But that said, to slightly counter my own point: I think that demonstrates a weakness with Scrum. If people following the system (even malicous compliance) can make it fail, then the system is flawed. It obviously sucks for those people or they wouldn't have a bad attitude about it. For example, Scrum likes to pretend that all engineers are fungible, but this is clearly wrong and a big problem with the system.