Why I Would Never Go “Enterprise Scrum”
I’ve had some recent debates regarding whether we should start an “enterprise Scrum” initiative, i.e. WE WILL BE A SCRUM SHOP. I would have completely supported this several years ago. Now, I am completely against it.
In an organization of any significant size or age, there typically have been methodologies that have been introduced, pushed, then they fade away into the far recesses of everyone’s memories. One characteristic of these methodologies is that they have very specific rules. You can’t add to, change, or remove any of the rules. Why? Well, because you wouldn’t be “doing” X methodology!!!
People have a habit of dogmatically following whatever methodology management makes them follow. Now let’s say we are doing “Enterprise Scrum”.
This means that you are performing the following ceremonies:
- Release Planning
- Sprint Planning (every sprint)
- Daily Scrum (every day)
- Sprint Review (every sprint)
- Sprint Retrospective (every sprint)
And, you have the following roles:
- (1) Scrum Master
- (1) Product Owner
- Team (self-organizing)
And you will have the following artifacts:
- Product Backlog
- Sprint Backlog
- Burndown/Burnup charts (some say Scrum requires these, I don’t think it does as it’s not clearly articulated and varies by source)
So we’ve gone enterprise Scrum. We’ve introduced this “by the book” Scrum. However, we’ve also preached “inspect and adapt”. But, in Scrum, the above items are non-negotiable…you can inspect and adapt all you want, but you can’t change the ceremonies, artifacts, and roles. Can you add to them? Sure, but you can’t “change” them. And, in reality, making “inspect and adapt” a cultural “habit” is spectacularly difficult and rarely truly attained.
What if we have a Scrum team that wants to do a retrospective every other sprint instead of every sprint? Blasphemy!!! <finger-pointing> YOU are doing SCRUM-BUT!!! </finger-pointing>. Really? What if the team, Scrum Master, and Product Owner are all cool with it? Now we have a bunch of stress, spinning, and politics because we want to make a change to our enterprise standard Scrum. In reality, this is perfectly okay. However, since we’ve pushed “Enterprise Scrum”, we have totally boxed ourselves in. There will even be people who will not want to add techniques because “Scrum doesn’t say so”. Do those people truly understand the essence of Scrum? No. But they will cause disruption and waste
What if you don’t want to do iterations? What if you want to deliver continuously instead of iteratively? No Iterations?!?! Blasphemy!!!! <finger-pointing> YOU are doing SCRUM-BUT!!! </finger-pointing>.
You know all of this could have been avoided? By NOT saying we are going “Enterprise Scrum”. I believe the best way to roll this out is by pushing Agile and Lean and what makes sense on a project by project basis. Along with this there should be some foundational elements that are standard regardless of the methodology/toolset that is used. In addition, there needs to be a COE that can ensure that consistency is maintained without bureaucracy, and that knowledge gained is effectively utilized to continuously improve.
Please don’t misunderstand my intention here. I am not bashing Scrum. I LOVE Scrum. I always use Scrum when I execute projects. However, I’ve had rare cases within the same company where Scrum was NOT optimal, but Kanban was. I was very thankful that Scrum was not the required standard.Talk to Us Today