J Veeraraaghavan

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n

So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n

So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n

Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n

So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n

Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n

So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};

Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next

\n
If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
1. Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
2. A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
3. Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
4. Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
5. Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
  So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
  I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
  What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
  Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
  
  Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
  
  \n
6. A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
  If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
  1. Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
    So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
    
    Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
    
    \n
  6. Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  7. A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
    If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
    1. Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    2. A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    3. Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    4. Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    5. Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
      So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
      I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
      What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
      Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
      
      Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
      
      \n
    6. A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    7. Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    8. A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
      If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
      1. Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      2. A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      3. Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      4. Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      5. Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
      6. A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      7. A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      8. Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      9. A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        How effective is the team with their retrospectives?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        How has the health of the backlog improved over time?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the team with their retrospectives?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        How effective is the collaboration of the team with the PO?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How has the health of the backlog improved over time?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the team with their retrospectives?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        How effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the collaboration of the team with the PO?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How has the health of the backlog improved over time?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the team with their retrospectives?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        \n
        How effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the collaboration of the team with the PO?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How has the health of the backlog improved over time?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the team with their retrospectives?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        First, let us understand some of the typical outcomes I am referring to, that Scrum Masters can truly make a contribution to. These could include, but not limited to, the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        How effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the collaboration of the team with the PO?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How has the health of the backlog improved over time?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the team with their retrospectives?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        \n
        This is my second blog in this subject and in a sense, an extension to the earlier one published in July this year (https:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/blog\/role-scrum-master-headed\/<\/a>). The role of the Scrum Master is a widely debated topic in the industry. The overlap (or the lack of it) with the traditional Project Manager role is all too well-known and we had dwelt on that a bit in the earlier blog. Having said that, I have always wondered how many Scrum Masters truly understand and internalize the various dimensions of their role to make a significant difference to their respective teams\u2019 outcomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        First, let us understand some of the typical outcomes I am referring to, that Scrum Masters can truly make a contribution to. These could include, but not limited to, the following:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        How effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the collaboration of the team with the PO?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How has the health of the backlog improved over time?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effective is the team with their retrospectives?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How self-driven or self-organizing is the team?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        How effectively are dependencies with other teams or components handled?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are new engineering practices introduced and their impact on team outcomes?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What is the overall impact of all these (mentioned above) on the team outcomes - such as say\/do ratios, quality of code delivered, hardening time and effort and so on?<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Elaborating a little bit on a couple of these outcomes \u2013 for example, how do you know how effective is the collaboration between Dev and QA? Ineffective collaboration often manifests as incomplete stories within a sprint, with pending testing or bug fixing forcing a carry forward of stories to the next sprint. In such situations, QA is often seen stretching on the last one or two days to complete testing and fighting to ensure bugs found are agreed upon as severe enough to be fixed in the same sprint. Energy levels seen in retrospectives, volunteering by team members for ownership of actions that come out and effective follow-up of actions by the team resulting in improved outcomes with team goals are all typical indicators of how effective is the team with retrospectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        While you can add to this list, for you to be effective in delivering on these outcomes, there are a couple of things that you as a Scrum Master need to understand and define:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        What are the enablers from your perspective for these to happen?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        What are your expectations from other stakeholders for you to be effective in your role?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        For both these, I firmly believe that you as a SM need to take the initiative. For example, you may want to take the initiative in defining and enriching this role in the organization and in its development to ensure the outcomes mentioned are indeed realistically achieved. I recently motivated one of the senior Scrum Masters in one of the organizations I consult with to take up this initiative. One of the things she has started with is to foster and build a community of SMs that would share learnings and experiences and together as a community make a difference to the organization. Fortunately in this case the organization leadership is also very supportive, even if they may not have all the right answers themselves on how to make this a successful role.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        That finally brings me to one of the pain points I see with many organizations that I coach from an Agile transformation perspective. This has to do with how they perceive the role of the SM and their failure to get the best out of their SMs because of the lack of understanding and appreciation for what the role brings to the table. They often treat the SM role as a team co-ordination role, with focus mainly on ensuring the Agile or Scrum ceremonies happen on a regular and consistent basis. As a result, even the skills looked for while hiring as well as the subsequent positioning and development opportunities for this role are both issues. Many organizations struggle to retain them beyond a couple of years and if some of the SMs do stay back, they do not know what to do with them after 2 or 3 years. I personally believe that using the role as a stepping stone for a leadership position (such as that of a line or delivery manager) is one great way to ensure the role gets the due recognition for organizational success.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Would love to hear from you on your own organization perspectives and experiences \u2013 would be excited to be involved in discussions around this topic.<\/p>\n","post_title":"How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"can-scrum-master-make-difference-team-outcomes","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:40:49","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9333","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":6039,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-26 17:11:55","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-26 11:41:55","post_content":"\n
        Having worked with several teams over the years, I dare say less than 10% of the Agile teams I have worked with could be classified as \u201cgenuinely self-managed\u201d. However, that does not mean that the goal of becoming a self-managed team is unrealistic. With an organization culture that is conducive to teams feeling empowered, self-managed teams will become a common feature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Let me now give an idea of what distinguishes self-managed teams from other teams in standard Agile \/ Scrum ceremonies. This is mostly based on my experience in working with such teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Daily stand-up meetings<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members address all other members when they give their updates and not the Scrum Master alone. And this happens in a very natural way.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Every team member is involved in the meeting and intently listening to the others\u2019 updates.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The team focuses on team goals and commitments so while individuals update what they did and plan to do, they also actively track (as a team) where the team is with respect to fulfilling their iteration commitments to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        If someone is stuck on something, there is a clear intent to cross boundaries to help out. Roles do not become a constraint in this process.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration planning<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Teams commit based on their comfort feeling in terms of what they can accomplish \u2013 they may break stories into tasks but invariably don\u2019t estimate effort for tasks with the intent of reconciling total estimated effort with capacity. In other words, their planning is commitment driven rather than being capacity driven.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        This does not mean estimating effort for tasks and matching with capacity is a wrong thing. On the other hand, it is a highly recommended process for teams that start on Agile. However, as teams become mature they get a sense of what to commit and how much to commit based on what the stories are expected to accomplish and don\u2019t necessarily need a detailed task break down with estimates of effort for the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Past velocity data is used as an input for making the commitment for the current iteration but self-managed teams again don\u2019t feel constrained by this. If the team did 30 points last iteration and they are comfortable committing 35 this time, they go with 35 and don\u2019t adopt safety as a tactic. They know they can pull it off by working together as a team.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Iteration reviews \/ demos<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Often the demos don\u2019t necessarily happen only at the end of the iteration as with most typical Agile projects. Business or business proxies are involved mid-iteration wherever possible. Team members take ownership for making this happen.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        In the end of iteration demos, the entire team is involved in terms of providing inputs, answering questions and so on. Team members take turn to do the demos making the commitment of the entire team visible to the business.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Follow-up on demo inputs for incorporating them into subsequent iteration planning as well as updating the product backlog as needed (with the involvement of the PO)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        Retrospectives<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        $\"Retrospective_example\"$ <\/figure>\n\n\n\n
        While the general purpose is to reflect on the process in terms of what went well and did not go well, self-managed teams clearly focus on missed commitments and what contributed to that so they don\u2019t have to deal with missed commitments again.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team members own up actions, demonstrate accountability and look up to management only when corrective actions are beyond the team and require management attention.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Even when the team is consistently delivering on commitments, self-managed teams look for actions to achieve higher (stretch) goals \u2013 there is focus on process innovation in addition to just incremental improvements<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        While these are some indicators of how self-managed teams work when it comes to the basic processes, when teams are self-managed they also have more fun than other teams. Team members trust each other and truly enjoy each other\u2019s company. They almost invariably don\u2019t stretch themselves on a day-to-day basis, however, when it comes to meeting tough commitments, they are prepared to stretch and do so on their own (without any push whatsoever from management).<\/p>\n","post_title":"What makes self-managed teams different?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"makes-self-managed-teams-different","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:41:26","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=6039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"1","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989587,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 17:08:35","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 11:38:35","post_content":"\n
        WayToGo Inc. is a leading CRM solutions provider headquartered in San Jose with development teams divided between San Jose and Bangalore. They have hired you as a consultant to help them transform to being an Agile enterprise focusing on shorter cycle times for delivery, higher quality and responsiveness for their customers. You have done a detailed assessment on their current practices and created a Blueprint for what they need to do to become truly Agile. One of the recommendations you have made is to create a well-defined role for a Scrum Master and ensure that WayToGo implements this with either dedicated or focused Scrum Masters and appropriately formed teams.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Pallav, Sudhindra and Raj are three Business Unit heads who need to implement this in their respective BUs. Each of them has constraints due to the fact that the company cannot create additional positions for the SM role and needs to manage with their current overall head count. While Pallav wants to go with senior engineers \/ technical leads playing a part time SM role for their respective teams, Sudhindra goes to the other extreme of asking his Managers to play this as an additional role wearing appropriate hats ( of a SM or a Manager, as needed) ensuring no role conflicts whatsoever. Finally, Raj wants to go with a dedicated SM, with the SM doing the role for two teams to start with. To ensure that he is not asking for additional head count, Raj gives up two of his open reqs for engineers and uses them to hire dedicated SMs from outside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What would your recommendation be to these three BU heads? Will the proposed arrangement work for the different BUs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing that worries me in this situation is the fact that the three BUs are taking entirely different approaches to implementing the SM role recommendation. This by itself is not an issue as long as the approaches are founded on a common rationale and principle. The reasoning the BU heads are using for their respective decisions seem to be something that suits their immediate purpose rather than a common logic or principle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is where the role of the Solutions Business Head (to whom the three BU heads report) is crucial. This person needs to drive the thinking behind creating a separate SM role and align all BU heads on that thinking. The separation of delivery from Product strategy \/ competence building (which is where the difference in the roles between SMs and Managers comes in) needs to be understood and all BU heads need to be aligned to this so they can implement the SM role in their respective BUs in spirit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In particular I would be worried about Sudhindra\u2019s thinking of having Managers play the SM role wearing a different hat. This is often not practical since the reporting relationship invariably comes in the way and team members can not differentiate a SM from the Manager role. This would defeat the very purpose of having a SM role. Only in extremely mature set ups with mature leaders as managers and teams that are self-organizing would this concept work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Team leads as SMs is a good first step in implementing the SM role except that the role needs to be given its due importance. For example, the team lead needs to spend at least 30 to 40% of his\/her time on the SM role. I would strongly suggest that the SM role becomes a pre-requisite for a team lead if he\/she were to become a manager. If they play the role for one or two years and show good leadership qualities, they could be promoted as managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Having a dedicated SM role is a great idea but the organization needs to show 100% commitment to the SM role for this to be successful. There should be proper definition of the role, career mapping for the role and training and ecosystems to support the role and the growth for a person in that role.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW # 68 \u2013 Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-68-resolving-different-approaches-implementing-sm-role-organization","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:04","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7446","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7308,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-07-17 12:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2017-07-17 07:18:28","post_content":"\n
        I have been often asked this question in my coaching stint with many organizations in India \u2013 \u201cWhat is the career path for a Scrum Master\u201d? Mike Cohn\u2019s blogs<\/a> on this provide some interesting perspectives but there are always questions on the extent of their relevance and applicability in the Indian context. Then there are follow-up questions such as \u201cWho can become a Scrum Master? Do we hire or look for lateral movements to that role from within the organization?\u201d and so on.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before we go into some of these aspects, a historical perspective is worth looking at and that has to do with a true \u201cProject Manager\u201d role. My question is about whether we have ever had a true Project Management Professional role in India? In my experience, most companies have had Project Managers who had both delivery as well as people management responsibility. A typical Project Manager 5 years ago (and perhaps even today in many organizations) would have 8 to 10 people reporting to her, who are all associated with a project that she is directly responsible for. In many cases, the PM is also a technical person and is expected to guide the team technically. So in essence you have a person responsible for project delivery who has people management AND technical guidance responsibilities. In such a situation, how do you expect a designated Project Manager to do justice to that role?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations working with conventional approaches have now moved to an Agile way of working with Scrum as the supporting Project Management framework. The first question that they have is \u201cWho should be the Scrum Master?\u201d Given that a Scrum Master is not responsible for people as well as for day to day technical guidance, who should play that role? What happens to the \u201cold\u201d Project Manager? Can some of them become Scrum Masters? If so, does it become a reduced role for them now, given that as a SM they have to give up their People Management responsibility? Can technical leads play that role effectively or would their technical guidance focus override the priority that the SM role demands?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Before attempting to answer these questions, a basic, fundamental thing needs to be understood and appreciated. And that is, that the SM role demands appropriate focus<\/em>. The Scrum guide talks about the role in detail. The Scrum Master is the Agile coach to the team, and is clearly the custodian of the Agile process that the team needs to define and implement. We also know that the SM is the bottleneck remover \/ resolver for the team. What is less often understood or appreciated is the fact that the SM is even the coach to the Product Owner when it comes to ensuring a healthy, prioritized backlog at all times. He or she has a critical role in shielding the team from pressures that the Product Management or the senior management exert \u2013 typically for higher scope or earlier than committed deliveries \u2013 and also motivate the team to meet commitments and to improve the process. And all this is expected to be done with no positional power or authority but through influential leadership skills.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Which brings us to the role of the Manager in the Agile context. Managers in the Agile world will continue to have responsibility for developing team member competencies, planning and doing their performance reviews, mentor team members in improving their performance and so on. They will also be responsible for working with Product Management on the roadmap, product strategies etc. and in ensuring that it is communicated to the team. However, what they will not and should not do is to get into managing a team\u2019s delivery on a day to day basis. Planning, tracking and ensuring delivery are the roles of the team and the Scrum Master and the Manager has no direct role in this process. They could of course help the team resolve a technical bottleneck but that is where it should stop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The essence of what we are saying is that a Manager is responsible for developing people, technology competence in the team and in playing a strategic role in terms of medium and long term perspectives but leave the day to day delivery responsibility to the Scrum Master and the team. Mixing the two roles ends up compromising both. If an organization has to succeed in the medium to long term it is imperative for them to separate these roles and provide appropriate focus to both.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The Scrum Master could be full time or part time \u2013 depending on the maturity of the team and the project \/ product requirements. A technical lead or a Project Manager could move into that role as long as they understand the role requirements and have the skills to perform the role. When the requirements are not complex and the team gets mature at implementing Agile and has learnt how to work as a self-organizing unit, the Scrum Master can handle additional responsibilities \u2013 such as doing a similar role for multiple teams or co-ordinating the work of multiple teams (using mechanisms such as Scrum of Scrum) or in coaching teams for becoming more Agile and so on. Some of those playing the role of a Scrum Master could, in future, move into managerial roles and would be great fits in those roles because of the leadership skills they gain while performing the SM role. Some organizations have implemented all of these concepts with a career path defined for a Scrum Master. In my opinion, these organizations are trend-setters for successful organizations of the future.<\/p>\n","post_title":"What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"role-scrum-master-headed","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:42:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7308","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7294,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-12 12:33:47","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-12 07:03:47","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Some recommendations for the CHOW<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        This is clearly not an ideal situation for you as a Scrum Master to be in. You have a 9-member team excluding yourself and the Product Owner with 6 in India and 3 in the US. Before we think of how to deal with the challenges, let us first list the top three challenges:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        The distributed engineering team (dev engineers distributed and all test engineers in India)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        The time-zone difference between India and the US<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Product Owner and Architect based in the US<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        A somewhat unique situation also arises out of challenges 1 and 3. The team in the US has access to the PO and Architect through the day for clarifications which the team in India does not have, whereas, the team in the US does not have access to the test engineers\u2019 time during their day time which the team in India is fortunate to have. A possible additional challenge (for which there is no explicit information given) relates to whether the Architect is dedicated for the team or is shared with multiple teams, which is often the case. If the person is indeed dedicated to your team, you have one less challenge to deal with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The first thing to do is to ensure that the team members are all aligned on a common goal. Ensuring team involvement in deciding and agreeing on a common goal at the beginning of every release as well as every sprint is crucial. The second thing to do is to ensure that the team agrees and abides by a common set of norms or a team charter. These two are important for even co-located teams but doubly critical for a distributed team. Some of the norms should address how they will communicate and collaborate with each other, mutual responsiveness, and sensitivity to time-zone differences as well as the need to be flexible and accommodative to team requirements, given the time zone differences. The entire team needs to be involved in both these and should own the goals as well as the team norms \/ charter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The time zone difference is the most difficult challenge often \u2013 especially given that it is US and India. The saving grace in this case is that Boston is the Eastern time zone so you have some overlap possible with teams in India. You can leverage the fact that teams in the US prefer to start early in the morning while folks in India prefer a later start to the day. This gives an opportunity for some overlap \u2013 I have seen many organizations work the 11am to 8pm shift that clearly gives them a 1.5 to 2 hours overlap in working. While a stand-up is ideal for a morning slot, one needs to understand that being together for the stand-up is more important hence a time such as 6 or 7 pm (depending on the time difference) may still be OK. Planning meetings that need to go a little longer may need more flexibility from team members in both locations and could invariably be combined with retro meetings to ensure you do this only once or twice a month based on the sprint duration. Ensuring the PO and Architect participate in the daily stand up and address clarifications the team may have as part of an extension of the stand-up meeting is one of the ways to address the time zone difference and associated delays \/ bottlenecks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Even with the PO and Architect attending the daily stand-up, the fact that they are available only for an overlap of 1 or 2 hours in a day is a limitation for the team. One way to deal with this is to ensure we have a surrogate for both these roles in the team in India \u2013 with one of the senior developers helping out with design decisions and clarifications (by working closely with the Architect) and either the SM or an Analyst type of person doing a similar role on behalf of the PO. We have recommended to many organizations with distributed teams that they have specific roles created for this purpose, which serves as a footprint for either or both roles. Some of these persons could eventually move into an Architect or PO role in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Lack of test engineers in the US presents a reasonably major challenge. I have seen a number of test engineers in such a situation complain about the quality of code they get from the remote counterparts. The only way you can address this is to increase the responsibility of development engineers in testing their own code so the role of test engineers becomes more of a validation exercise. Another approach is to bring in engineering practices such as Test Driven Development, Acceptance Test Driven Development with test automation \u2013 this will eventually enhance the development engineers\u2019 role and reduce the need for test engineers doing low level testing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One final thought \u2013 distributed teams are challenging but if the members have the right mind-set and collaborative behaviour, there is no reason why they can\u2019t be successful. The role of the SM in getting such teams to exhibit the right mind-set cannot be overstated.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #50\u2013 How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-50-scrum-master-deal-distributed-team-situation","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:10","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7294","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7312,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 13:10:44","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 07:40:44","post_content":"\n
        I have been involved with three organizations in the recent past where there have been some major debates about whether teams need a full-time Scrum Master (SM) to be successful. Many of these discussions have involved senior leaders in the company feverishly arguing why one approach will work better than another. And in all these cases, I have found them coming out with strong reasons supporting their viewpoints \u2013 all based on their own personal prior experience.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In all these discussions, everyone has been clear on one thing \u2013 and that is the fact that a Scrum Master does indeed make the team more productive. If someone can help remove impediments, mediate with PO on requirements and priorities, resolve resource or dependency issues on behalf of the team etc., the team is able to focus 100% on what they do best and so obviously becomes more productive. But the key question is whether this is a full-time job for a team and is economically justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Firstly, the answer to the question on having a Scrum Master for a team is not binary \u2013 that is either have a full-time Scrum Master or have no one playing that role. The argument that some people use for not having a Scrum Master is simple \u2013 in Agile, teams are expected to be self-organizing so why do we need a Scrum Master? Let me give a recent experience to illustrate this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        In one of our engagements, a person playing the role of the Scrum Master for a team went through our Agile Awareness session where we talked about self-organizing teams. A week after the training, when the team had missed out on a commitment and he was asked by his management on what happened, his response was truly Agile (!) \u2013 that he thought that he did not have a role to play since he expected the team to be self-organizing!! We had to intervene as part of our coaching session with him \u2013 and help him understand his role as a Scrum Master in getting the team to be self-organizing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So what then is the answer for whether a team needs a full-time Scrum Master? What factors determine when we need a full time Scrum Master and how do we economically justify it for a team?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If one were to look at a recommended checklist<\/a> of responsibilities for a Scrum Master it would be obvious that it takes up a substantial part of one\u2019s time to play that role effectively. Especially for teams that are beginning their Agile journey, the role of the SM in ensuring that the team understands and internalizes Agile\/Scrum values and principles and implements them in action is a huge ask. To add the responsibility of resolving impediments and coordinating with other teams and concerned stakeholders would mean substantially more time on the SM\u2019s part. To make the team self-organizing, the SM has to sense how the team is working together and collaborating on various aspects and provide timely inputs to help them work better with each other. All this for a team that is starting out could mean a near full time responsibility. In our experience, even for teams that have some experience working with Agile, a SM would typically need to spend at least 50% of their time for all these responsibilities. So if you do have average or slightly above average teams in terms of Agile maturity, a full time SM could perhaps handle two Scrum teams at the most as a Scrum Master.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So the follow-up question is \u201cCan I have a person within the team \u2013 either a developer or a tester \u2013 play the SM role if it demands only 50% of a person\u2019s time to play that role \u2013 assuming my team is fairly mature with Agile\u201d? The answer is yes, provided the person chosen has the required traits and skills to play the SM role. It is also important that the SM role in this case is the primary responsibility for that person. Invariably, the person may devote substantially more time to the SM responsibilities initially and as the team becomes mature with Agile behaviour, the time spent on the SM role would reduce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What if I have a three or four member team? For such small sized teams, you don\u2019t need too many formal processes for them to function effectively. They could share some of the responsibilities that a typical SM does or take turns to do whatever minimum that needs to be done for them to function effectively as a team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Finally, there is the question of whether a manager can be a Scrum Master for his\/her team? Given the reporting conflict involved, it would be very difficult to expect a team to become self-organizing if their own manager was their Scrum Master. There may be exceptions to this but in general it is recommended that the SM role be separated from the role of the Engineering Manager.<\/p>\n","post_title":"Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"need-full-time-scrum-master-team","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:36","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7312","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7286,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2017-03-02 12:28:21","post_date_gmt":"2017-03-02 06:58:21","post_content":"\n
        You are the Scrum Master for a team that is distributed between India and the US. You have two development engineers, the architect and the Product Owner based in Boston, US while three development and three test engineers are based out of Bangalore, India. As the Scrum Master of the team, you are based out of India. You understand the challenges of a distributed team but agreed to go ahead with this team structure due to the skills constraint that your product delivery has to take into consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        You have gone through a Scrum Master training and understand the roles and responsibilities of an effective Scrum Master. Even though a distributed structure such as what you have been given is not ideal, you need to do everything to make it work as well as possible. What are some of the things that you would do as a Scrum Master in this case?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested Solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #48\u2013 How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-48-best-deal-situation-scrum-master","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:43:54","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7286","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7249,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-10-11 16:20:24","post_date_gmt":"2016-10-11 10:50:24","post_content":"\n
        Vidyut is a SM who has attended a Scrum program conducted by a fairly well known Scrum Trainer. In response to a question, the Trainer mentions that while the Scrum guide talks about the PO being part of a Scrum team, the PO has a different role from the Scrum Team considering the fact that he\/she represents the demand side of a typical software development project while the development team and the Scrum Master represent the supply side. As a result, he opined that the PO typically does not belong to the team fully and does not attend scrum ceremonies such as stand-ups or retrospectives. He also mentioned that the PO attending these Scrum ceremonies will prevent the development team from opening up completely. Vidyut appreciates this as his organization, Customer Global Inc, has always had the POs located in the US while the team is located in India and the POs reported into a different structure. The POs were also demanding by nature and this in many ways isolated them from the development team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        At the beginning of this year, Customer Global decides to set up a local PO organization in India to ensure the team gets better support on a day to day basis for user stories and clarifications that the development teams have. Shravan is the new PO identified for Vidyut\u2019s team. Shravan is very forward looking and highly collaborative and is surprised to hear from Vidyut that he cannot attend the team\u2019s daily stand-ups. When he asks for an explanation from Vidyut on this, Vidyut maintains that has always been the practice and the team was not comfortable having the PO attend the daily stand-up. To substantiate his views, he quotes what the Scrum trainer mentioned as part of the training program. Shravan is surprised to hear this view and seeks the help of the Agile coach for Customer Global in India to resolve the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        If you were the Agile coach, what would your recommendation be and how would you solve the problem?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        It is apparent from the situation that the concerns of the team \/ SM come from their stereotypes of the PO role and how things have worked so far. They have found the PO demanding, not fully appreciative of their own challenges related to delivery and so do not want the PO meddling in what they believe are ceremonies (such as stand-ups) that only concern the delivery team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Shravan as a new PO seems to be coming with a refreshing outlook, seems keen on being collaborative and so should be encouraged to work closer with the team. After all, one of the Agile principles clearly states that business people and developers need to work together on a daily basis and what better way to ensure this, than having the PO involved in stand-ups.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        As the coach, you need to first sit with Vidyut (SM) to understand where he is coming from. If there has been a wrong understanding of the PO role you need to help correct that perception \u2013 after all, the SM is the link between the PO and the team and if the PO is genuinely interested in being part of the team, the SM\u2019s job in enabling this becomes easier. If past history is the reason for the SM\u2019s concerns, then the SM needs to be helped to bury that, and become open to trying out having the PO attend the stand-ups. The PO needs to be made clear of his own role in the stand-ups \u2013 of being a supportive stakeholder than a person who monitors work done by the team. In this case that does not seem to be an issue as the PO seems to be a forward looking and collaborative person.
        The SM can take your inputs to the team to ensure they are on the same page. As a coach, you can facilitate a discussion with the team as well, on this, so they understand the role of PO in this context. Having the team try out having the PO attend a few meetings would help. They would then get to experience the real value, and it will also allay their own fears in this regard.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #30\u2013 Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his \/ her role in the stand-up?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-30-po-attend-daily-stand-role-stand","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:08","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7249","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7211,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 15:31:36","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 10:01:36","post_content":"\n
        This is an example of an engineering organization that is structured based on areas of specialization (such as the core product engine, user experience (UX), developer experience, system integration, common engineering services and so on). Any typical product release involves about 15 to 20 different teams belonging to different areas mentioned above and spread across four different global locations (US, Europe and India) coming together for the delivery. The releases typically involve 3 to 4 month cycles with 2-week iterations most of the time. While a significant majority of the teams are cross functional within the engineering areas mentioned above and co-located with their own Product Owner stationed with the team, there are some exceptions especially with the POs located in the US for some teams. In addition, there are a couple of teams focused on end to end integration and inter-operability testing working independent of the scrum teams mentioned above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The organization has an excellent tool to capture and track status of their release goals, epics and user stories as well as the commitments in terms of sprints that the teams are working on. There is also some collaboration happening at an Engineering heads level as well as amongst Product Management heads on an on-going basis (this typically happens once a week) but there is no centralized release planning or tracking at an overall release level. There is an expectation from the Engineering Management and Product Management for teams to deliver committed features on the release date planned and to work with each other on dependencies to ensure this happens.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One of the things that this organization is facing involves long hardening cycles \u2013 a typical 4 month release features 6-8 weeks of hardening effort on the average with two major contributing factors: one is bug leakage from a current sprint into the upcoming sprints and secondly bugs reported by final integration testing which takes significant elapse time and effort to fix. There is also an additional issue of new features coming in towards the end of the release forcing teams to work over time to accommodate them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The challenge for the organization is to bring down the hardening cycle dramatically \u2013 from 6 to 8 weeks to perhaps two or three weeks at the most. How would you deal with this challenge?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Suggested solution:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
        A recommended approach to deal with the Challenge<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The key measure here is the duration of the hardening cycle and you need to know what the contributing factors \/ reasons are for such a long hardening cycle. Some possible reasons include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        1. What the Definition of Done (DoD) includes and how strictly it is implemented. Is completion of testing and fixing of all defects (at least high priority ones) mandatory for a story to be closed in a sprint? Who is authorized to close the story? Is there pressure from PO or your own management to close a story even if there are bugs unfixed, just to show a higher velocity to your higher management?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        One information given is that there is leakage of defects from a sprint into future sprints. What kind of defects are these? Why were they not found in the sprint in which the story was supposed to be completed?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        2. Integration testing discovering a lot of defects is an expensive process because bugs found in final integration after your sprints are complete take more time to debug, fix and retest causing an extended hardening cycle. Analysis of bugs from final integration will tell you whether such issues could be avoided with better planning and dependency management across teams.<\/p>\n","post_title":"CHOW #9\u2013 Long hardening cycles for Product releases","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"chow-9-long-hardening-cycles-product-releases","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:15","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7211","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"},{"ID":7314,"post_author":"15","post_date":"2016-03-23 13:48:28","post_date_gmt":"2016-03-23 08:18:28","post_content":"\n
        A certainly debatable and may be controversial question. Scott Ambler (SA) debunks the Standish Group\u2019s Chaos report that claims that only one third of all projects world-wide are successful. He uses his own survey to gauge success and claims that two-thirds of Agile projects are successful. One can question whether Scott\u2019s survey and data are really valid, but based on my own experience of working with many organizations in an Agile coaching role for close to a hundred teams over the last 10 years, I believe that represents a reasonable reality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Now the big question is how does one define Project Success? And who should define it? While we can endlessly debate on what defines success, let me take the easier route by using Scott Ambler\u2019s definition:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Successful <\/em>if a solution has been delivered and it met its success criteria within a range acceptable to the organization;<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Challenged <\/em>if a solution was delivered, but the team did not fully meet all of the project\u2019s success criteria within acceptable ranges (for example, the quality was fine, the project was pretty much on time, but ROI was too low);<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Failed <\/em>if the team did not deliver a solution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        Interestingly, Scott talks about ROI as an example of a criterion and not so much directly the cost or the budget involved. This seems sensible because cost and budget are constraints and only when you compare them to value delivered do we have a meaningful metric. So ROI becomes a more appropriate metric to look at. While normal projects also look at ROI, more often than not, success is measured by effort or schedule overshoot and not so much the ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        The next question is about who should define success. Is it the development team, the Product Owner (PO) or going one step further, the end user or customer involved? My own view is that success is measured by the Agile team and the PO (representing the customer) together, taking a holistic view of benefits \/ outcomes and making every effort towards achieving them including NOT doing some work, if the ROI does not justify that. Having said that, there must be a clear alignment on criteria for success across all concerned stakeholders and a mutual agreement on the way those will be measured. In a vast majority of projects, timeliness and quality of delivery, value delivered and ROI would be key determinants for success, and given the way teams work in a typical Agile project, it is fair to expect almost all Agile projects to succeed<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        So are all agile projects successful?<\/em> I am sure you are curious to know why and how \u2013 you will appreciate when you consider and understand the following are the key characteristics for an Agile project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Team working on a prioritized list of features, with priorities based on value delivered to users and a corresponding ROI<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A \u201clean\u201d approach to cutting down on waste by focusing on just-in-time design and development of high-priority features (no huge specifications or massive architectures and designs, no un-tested code etc. etc.)<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A cross-functional team with all the required skills collaborating with the customer \/ customer proxy (PO) on an on-going basis through the course of the project<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Constant \/ frequent user feedback on what the team does and produces, with the team responsive to feedback and changes<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A shippable product increment ready to be deployed, virtually every few weeks or as required<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
        If these characteristics were indeed true, I am sure you will agree that the probability that an Agile project will ever fail is close to zero. If that is indeed the case, why is it that one-third of Agile projects are still challenged or fall in the fail category (assuming Scott Ambler is indeed right with his survey data)? In my own experience, the following could be possible reasons:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        \n
        Lack of effective collaboration between development and test teams, and between the engineering team overall and the concerned PO. Given that we are dealing with human beings and the soft aspects involved in effective collaboration, the organization culture plays a huge role in this process. It takes a while, sometimes even a few years, before things fall in place in this regard even if the organization is fully aligned and supporting.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        A related point on development and test team collaboration is on organization structures and reporting relationships combined with Performance Management Systems. For true cross functional collaboration to happen, we need the two teams to be well-aligned in terms of Agile values & culture, effective matrix structures and a suitably aligned Performance Management System.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective POs, with their lack of clarity on requirements, often end up confusing and frustrating engineering teams.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Ineffective Scrum Masters whose role is to cushion the team from mid-sprint changes and interrupts, often do a poor job of this, allowing Product Management and their own delivery leadership teams to play around with the team\u2019s time and priorities.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
        Most organizations don\u2019t have an effective balance when it comes to Product Management and Engineering leadership. They are either very strong in one of the areas \u2013 Engineering or Product Management \u2013 and weak in the other area. Strong Engineering (with weak Product Management) organizations may become irrelevant in the market place very soon as they are out of tune with reality. Where the Product Management is strong (and Engineering relatively weak), I have seen Product Management thrust decisions on engineering and mis-interpret Agile to mean that changes can be done at will and that planning is a meaningless exercise. In such organizations, \u2018scope is flexible when schedule is rigid\u2019 works only in theory.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
        So, in order for all Agile projects to really succeed, one needs to consider and address all the above mentioned aspects and challenges. And that does not happen over-night.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        I will leave you with one final thought \u2013 it is still wonderful to see that two-thirds of Agile projects succeed (going by Scott Ambler\u2019s survey). I believe that with better organizational maturity happening over time combined with effective Agile adoption coaching that drives improvements and the required transformation much faster, we should start to see even better numbers in the next couple of years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        What is your view \/ experience on success percentage of Agile projects?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
        Look forward to hearing from you!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Does going Agile guarantee project success?","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"going-agile-guarantee-project-success","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-25 12:44:32","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=7314","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        J Veeraraaghavan
        
        Agile
        
        How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        November 6, 2017
        
        Agile
        
        What makes self-managed teams different?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        July 26, 2017
        
        Chow
        
        CHOW # 68 – Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        July 17, 2017
        
        Agile
        
        What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        July 17, 2017
        
        Chow
        
        CHOW #50– How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        March 12, 2017
        
        Agile
        
        Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        March 2, 2017
        
        Chow
        
        CHOW #48– How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        March 2, 2017
        
        Chow
        
        CHOW #30– Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his / her role in the stand-up?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        October 11, 2016
        
        Chow
        
        CHOW #9– Long hardening cycles for Product releases
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        March 23, 2016
        
        Agile
        
        Does going Agile guarantee project success?
        
        by J Veeraraaghavan
        March 23, 2016
        
        Page 4 of 5 Previous 1 … 3 4 5 Next
        
        PM Power Consulting helps organizations achieve agility in design and delivery of software and services.
        
        Our Offerings
        
        Execution Excellence
        
        Leadership Development
        
        Organizational Excellence
        
        About Us
        
        Blog
        
        Podcasts
        
        Contact
        
        Experts
        
        © 2025
        
        PM Power Consulting
        
        Linkedin Facebook Youtube
        
        Search for:

How can you, as a Scrum Master, make a difference to team outcomes?

What makes self-managed teams different?

CHOW # 68 – Resolving different approaches to implementing a SM role in an organization

What is the role of the Scrum Master and where is it headed?

CHOW #50– How should the Scrum Master deal with this distributed team situation?

Do you need a full-time Scrum Master for a team?

CHOW #48– How best would you deal with this situation as a Scrum Master?

CHOW #30– Should the PO attend the daily stand-up? What is his / her role in the stand-up?

CHOW #9– Long hardening cycles for Product releases

Does going Agile guarantee project success?

PM Power Consulting helps organizations achieve agility in design and delivery of software and services.

Our Offerings

Execution Excellence

Leadership Development

Organizational Excellence

Large-Scale Transformation To Agile

Starting & Scaling Agile Transformation

Fully Automated Analytics Platform

ehancing project management capabilities

Enterprise Wide Digital Transformation

Books

Videos

SPS Podcast

FSL Podcast

Blogs

Challenge Of the Week