Do the Scaling frameworks stay true to Scrum?
Scaling Scrum, part 12
This is part 12 of the series:
The many approaches to scale Scrum — an introduction
Scaling Scrum, part 1medium.com
Disclaimer
Before you think about scaling Scrum, consider if this will truly resolve your issues.
Don’t scale until you have fixed your issues with Scrum adoption. Many reasons to scale Scrum can be removed by ‘doing Scrum’ properly.
Scoring explained
I intend to asses by comparing Scrum of Scrums to Scrum according to the Scrum Guide. I will address how individual frameworks impact Scrum for every attention area. I will give scores from 1 to 5:
1: doesn’t meet the purpose as Scrum described it
2: barely meets Scrum’s purpose
3: some elements seriously impact Scrum’s purpose
4: has a small negative impact on Scrum’s purpose
5: fully meeting Scrum’s purpose
Why do I score it like this? Well:
Every role, event and artifact has a purpose. “Scrum exists only in its entirety” — Scrum Guide 2017.
Whenever the purpose is impacted by the way a framework is prescribing it this will have an effect on the rating of that part of the framework.
Scrum
For your reference: here’s the link to the Scrum Guide. My understanding of the Scrum Guide forms the basis of my assessment.
Scrum Guide | Scrum Guides
The official Scrum Guide provided in HTML format on the web.www.scrumguides.org
Introduction to Scrum of Scrums
Please find an introduction of the Scrum of Scrums below:
Scrum of Scrums, an introduction
Scaling Scrum, part 5medium.com
Here ends the introduction. On to the assessment!
Assessment
Maximising Product Value
Scrum is:
“A framework within which people can address complex adaptive problems, while productively and creatively delivering products of the highest possible value.” — Scrum Guide 2017
This is the whole reason to use Scrum in the first place. For me it’s the number one thing that needs to remain in place. Hence the score weighs far heavier than those on events, artifacts and roles. I rate them three times as heavy than other scores.
Scrum of Scrums aims to align between teams to maximise the product value. Having said this: this technique of aligning via the Scrum of Scrums runs the risk of ignoring the need for cross-functional teams. It gives an incentive to accept inter-dependencies between teams and as a result accepting that teams build parts of a total solution that only is “Done” when integrated.
Score: 4
Empiricism
Scrum of Scrums finds it important to keep Scrum intact. However adding events with representatives of teams only — and allowing to have a need for the events — do impact transparency because not everyone has direct access to the same information. Information can be easily accessible, but that is not the same as attending an event like the Scrum of Scrums. This also impacts the opportunity to inspect and adapt.
Score: 4
Roles, Events and Artifacts
Below are individual assessments on roles, events and artifacts that result in one average score.
Scrum Roles
The Scrum Master (or another representative of the Scrum Team) has an additional role: being part of the Scrum of Scrums to align between teams. It can be argued that this type of alignment isn’t part of the responsibilities of a Scrum Master (according to the Scrum Guide).
The Product Owner role remains intact. Also the role of the Development Team stays the same.
Score: 4
Scrum Events and Refinement
The Scrum of Scrums and optionally the ‘Scrum of Scrum of Scrums’ are additional events that can have impact on how teams work in a Scrum environment.
The original Scrum Events stay the same.
Score: 4
Scrum Artifacts and Definition of Done (DoD)
This approach doesn’t have an impact on the Scrum Artifacts and the DoD.
Score: 5
Average score roles, events, artifacts: 4.3
Verdict: 4.1 out of 5
Product Value is the purpose of Scrum and this is why I weigh it 3 times the roles, events and artifacts. Empiricism is the cornerstone of Scrum and therefore I decides it has twice the weight of the roles, events and artifacts.
Scrum of Scrums only has a small impact on the roles, events, artifacts and DoD.
By having Scrum of Scrums you may drop the incentive to have full cross-functional teams delivering a “Done” increment which can have a negative impact on maximising product value.
The one or two events allow companies to ignore possible issues with transparency, impacting empiricism.
Scrum of Scrums is the simplest solution to scale Scrum. Still one or more events are added that allow companies to ignore possible issues with cross-functionality and transparency. Scrum of Scrums scores lower than Less on the small to medium scaling options as it adds events while LeSS doesn’t.
Thanks for reading. Feel free to bang that clap button. You can give up to 50 👏’s. Give it a try if you enjoy this article!
My twitter profile is https://twitter.com/WJAgeling
Do you want to publish in Serious Scrum? Connect with us on Slack to make it happen!
We run a Serious Scrum channel on Slack. You’re all invited. Feel free to reach out and connect with us on Slack to share your thoughts.