I really love my role as a Scrum Master and Agile Coach, though it sometimes packs a punch of surprises. Somehow, I’ve become the go-to virtuoso on Scrum among friends and colleagues. While it might sound grand, it is a mixed blessing.
Picture me at a friend’s birthday party, devouring a slice of carrot cake. Nearby, a bunch of healthcare pros rant about their bad experiences with Scrum—or “scrummen“, as they hilariously dubbed it in Dutch. My husband, who happens to love the drama, pointed at me and announced, “…but Bas is a Scrum Master!” Cue the spotlight. Eyes all on me. Were they curious …or about to reach for pitchforks?
The conversation that followed was insightful, it highlighted a common theme I often encounter; most gripes with Scrum stem from botched implementations and misguided beliefs. It also highlighted the diversity of Scrum implementations across industries.
Scrum aims to boost communication, transparency, and continuous improvement. However, misconceptions about its implementation often lead to frustration and criticism.
Tales like these? They are abundant. Trust me, there are videos out there with clickbait titles like “Scrum Sucks”. Triggered already? I get sent these videos often.
These tales have inspired me to start a series dissecting and, where possible, debunking these videos. It’s high time we cut through the fog and shine a light on the true culprits behind failed Scrum rollouts!
The video
In the YouTube short ‘Scrum’ by PirateSoftware, creator Thor vents his frustration with Scrum, mainly due to the excessive number of meetings it entails. As a programmer, he stresses the inefficiency these meetings cause. A Daily Scrum, intended to be a quick 15-minute session, effectively eats up 45 minutes of his time, considering the disruption to his workflow. Furthermore, it takes him an additional 30 to 60 minutes to regain focus, rendering the morning largely unproductive.
Thor criticizes ‘standups’ as a major part of Scrum, deeming them a significant waste of time. He suggests an alternative where a producer or project manager attends these meetings and then emails the notes to the team. This approach would let the development team stay productive, like a gaming scenario where the producer or manager acts as a ‘paladin’ tanking the damage, while the developers, akin to ‘DPS‘, continue to focus on their work without unnecessary interruptions.
Claims (and debunks)
Claim 1: Excessive meetings (from 00:03 onward)
” (…) the main reason that I hate Scrum, is the amount of meetings and bullshit that come out of Scrum (…)”
Thor mentions that Scrum involves too many meetings, particularly slamming the Daily Scrum.
While Scrum includes several events (Sprint Planning, Daily Scrum, Sprint Review, and Sprint Retrospective), these are designed to boost communication, transparency, and continuous improvement. The Daily Scrum is timeboxed to 15 minutes and serves as a quick check-in to synchronize activities and plan the next 24 hours. It reduces the need for other meetings, ensuring the team stays aligned and can swiftly tackle impediments. For instance, in my Scrum teams, Daily Scrums quickly pinpointed and helped resolve issues, keeping Sprints on track despite their complexity.
Claim 2: Workflow disruption (from 00:11 onward)
“(…) standup lasts maybe 15 minutes, these 30 minutes are now lost. It’s now a 45-minute meeting. That’s what that is. Even though it only lasted 15 minutes, it’s taking 45 minutes of my time – and everyone else’s time (…)”
“(…) Oh wait, let’s go further. It takes me about 30 to 60 minutes to get back into a workflow. Shit! Now we have about an hour and 45 minutes that are taken. But, oh wait! It’s almost lunchtime, so basically nothing before lunch gets done for anybody on the team to any effectiveness (…)”
Thor also argues that these meetings disrupt workflow significantly.
However, effective Scrum practices promote better workflow management. The short, focused nature of Scrum events minimizes disruption and helps maintain a steady workflow. Moreover, regaining focus after meetings can be a personal productivity issue, which can be improved through better time management and practice. My Scrum teams found that holding Daily Scrums at the start of the day minimized disruption, allowing developers to dive into focused work immediately after.
Claim 3: Standups as a waste of time (from 00:33 onward)
“(…) I hate standups and they’re a big part of Scrum. I hate all of that, it is a huge waste of time. (…)”
Thor doesn’t mince words here; he calls standups a waste of time.
But, when done right, standups are powerful tools for fostering team collaboration and quick issue resolution. They offer a chance for team members to highlight impediments, align on goals, and ensure everyone is working towards the Sprint Goal. If standups seem unproductive, it might mean the Scrum Master needs to facilitate them more effectively to keep them focused and efficient.
A well-facilitated standup should last no more than 15 minutes. The goal is to inspect progress towards the Sprint Goal and adjust the plan as needed. Team members discuss what progress has been made, what they plan to do next, and any impediments blocking their progress. This synchronization ensures the team stays aligned and can swiftly tackle any issues.
Claim 4: Notes via email are better (from 00:37 onward)
“(…) This is what I’d rather have. I would rather have a producer or a project manager. Go to that meeting for everyone on the team and give them notes, in an email, so that everyone kicks ass while they’re doing that. (…)”
Thor suggests replacing meetings with notes via email from a project manager or producer.
This idea undermines the core Scrum principle of face-to-face communication, recognized as the most effective method of conveying information within a team. Emails can’t replace the dynamic and immediate feedback loop that real-time interactions during Scrum events provide. Face-to-face communication, even if virtual, fosters immediate feedback and richer discussions that emails often fail to achieve.
Concluding
The frustrations in the video reflect widespread misunderstandings about Scrum. Usually, they stem from poor implementation rather than flaws in the framework itself. Effective Scrum practice requires adherence to its principles, proper facilitation, and a focus on continuous improvement to reap the productivity and collaboration benefits intended by the Scrum framework.
Successful Scrum implementation requires dedication to its principles and a willingness to continuously adapt and improve. By understanding and addressing common pitfalls, teams can unlock the full potential of Scrum.
Reflecting on the video and my experiences as a Scrum Master, it’s evident that many issues stem from misconceptions and misapplications of Scrum practices. Like those healthcare professionals at the birthday party, many critics haven’t seen Scrum in its true form but rather a distorted version. My goal with this series is to shed light on these misconceptions and show how, when done right, Scrum can be a powerful tool for any team.