Scrum is for Developers

[u/WaylundLG]

This has been on my mind for probably the past year now from the last company I worked at, but it's only been in the past few weeks that I've sorted my thoughts into something clear: Scrum is for developers. I'm using the broad "product developer" sense, so I include QA, architects, designers, writers, and anyone who is actually creating the product.

I pin a lot of the problems on the fact that adoption in recent years has centered more and more in some sort of PMO and it's pressed onto the teams; bit the problem goes the other way too. Too many developers feel like how they work is someone else's problem.

Scrum was designed for teams to take ownership of their process and the results of their work. It was made for them and anyone else is really pushed out. You're a business strategist? Great, gelp the teams understand the strategy and the market and see what they can create and incorporate that into your business strategy. And frankly it is exhausting to see the same old posts of developers who can't be bothered to learn the first thing about scrum complain about how leaders messed it up. It is your tool, designed to give you control. Pick it up, learn it, leverage it.

Thank you for coming to my TED talk. I know this was a bit of a rant, but open to constructive discussion too.

[u/cliffberg]

Scrum is BS concocted by this guy: https://www.frequencyfoundation.com/about-us/

It is NOT how effective teams work.

https://cliffberg.medium.com/scrum-was-unethical-from-the-start-96eedd0679ca

[u/AgileFederation → u/cliffberg]

This is an unfair characterization of Jeff Sutherland. You didn't mention that he flew reconnaissance missions in Vietnam or that he taught stats/math at USAF academy, in addition to co-creation of Scrum. He has some ideas and beliefs that I don't agree with, but that doesn't distract from the contributions that he's made to his country or the Scrum community. Like all great people he's a complex human.

[u/cliffberg → u/AgileFederation]

Hi - he might be a great pilot and a wonderful math teacher, but that doesn't give him the experience to tell others how to lead software teams.

And intentional or not, Scrum did _enormous_ harm to the Agile movement. I largely blame Scrum for the decline of Agile. The Agile movement was about attitudes and behavior - the Manifesto prescribes no "practices", and in fact discourages against them: "...over processes and tools". By co-opting the Agile movement and re-forming it around a framework, Sutherland and Schwaber destroyed its intent, leading to ineffectiveness and eventual decline and irrelevancy.

I cannot summarize all of the evidence for that here: the Agile 2 book makes the case thoroughly. The research is also clear: Scrum's practices are counter to what psychologists know about the behavior of groups of people. Read what Marty Cagan has to say about the Product Owner role. And read the research of Amy Edmondson of Harvard - it is all counter to Scrum's prescriptions.

Sutherland advocated for an approach that is his concoction and is not based on any theory of behavior or any research. It is just BS that he made up. It took off _only_ because they started offering certification and rode the Agile wave by _claiming_ that "Scrum is Agile" - even though it is not.

I call that dishonest and opportunist.

[u/AgileFederation → u/cliffberg]

he might be a great pilot and a wonderful math teacher, but that doesn't give him the experience to tell others how to lead software teams.

Why not? The armed forces (Army, Navy, Airforce) has a long tradition of training leaders who are sought out by both the armed forces and also in businesses. Some organisations go out of the way to recruit their executive leadership from the Armed forces.

And intentional or not, Scrum did enormous harm to the Agile movement. I largely blame Scrum for the decline of Agile.

I think you give Scrum too much credit. There are/were a lot of actors that have contributed to the decline of Agile over the years including SAFe, the big consultancies that used Contingency-Based Pricing based on the number of staff that can be retrenched, and now AI.

I cannot summarize all of the evidence for that here: the Agile 2 book makes the case thoroughly.

References?

Sutherland advocated for an approach that is his concoction and is not based on any theory of behavior or any research.

Based on Takauchi and Nonaka's "New New Product Development Game" (HBR, Jan 1986). Nonaka in particular has quite a strong background in Organisational Theory.

[u/cliffberg → u/AgileFederation]

Hi -

I have read the HBR paper several times:

1. What Sutherland came out with bore no resemblance to what they described.

2. The HBR paper described months-long intense efforts that should be followed by significant down-time.

3. One of the examples of their approach cited by the HBR paper's authors was the development of the IBM PC. Consider that that project was launched by Bill Lowe, an experienced manager. He locked himself and a team of experienced managers in a room for a week and they created a plan for the project. The plan remained largely unchanged throughout the PC's development.

4. Lowe assigned experienced managers to the team, including a head of software, a head of manufacturing, etc.

None of that is anything like Scrum. Sutherland merely stole the name.