In a software development team, Scrum process prescribes a designated Product Owner and a Scrum Master. As recommended, these roles should be full-time roles - meaning, ideally a team should not designate one of the team members to play either of these roles part-time while doing his/her own job. However, in a start-up environment, it may not be possible to hire someone full-time for the Product Owner and the Scrum Master roles.
While the team manager makes it a priority to hire people for these roles in the long term or when budget allows, the team must improvise and figure out how to fulfill these roles. Those who adhere to the Scrum process too rigidly are often opposed to the idea of improvising. Sometimes they are unwilling to start the process until all the right people are found. This rigidity damages the team morale, the team's existing process and eventually affects the product.
To state the obvious, what works for one team may not work for another. It is up to the team to decide what elements of the Scrum they can adopt right away and what they would improvise. Scrum relies on the Sprint Retrospectives to "inspect and adapt" - to review whether the improvisations worked and what corrections are needed.
In some teams, the team manager plays the role of the Product Owner until a full-time one is hired, since the team manager is probably communicating with the necessary stakeholders. In other teams, the Project Manager or the Product Manager temporarily plays the role of the Product Owner.
In the absence of a full time Scrum Master, some teams select their QA lead to take on the role until a full time is hired. Team lead or other team members can also alternate as Scrum Master. Team can also rotate the role for a sprint among the members.
The associated cost of team members taking on multiple roles is lower than not having a process until all necessary roles are hired.
Scrum provides a standard framework - the teams should be flexible enough to adopt some of it and improve upon the rest sprint by sprint to make a quality product, not to make a quality process.
While the team manager makes it a priority to hire people for these roles in the long term or when budget allows, the team must improvise and figure out how to fulfill these roles. Those who adhere to the Scrum process too rigidly are often opposed to the idea of improvising. Sometimes they are unwilling to start the process until all the right people are found. This rigidity damages the team morale, the team's existing process and eventually affects the product.To state the obvious, what works for one team may not work for another. It is up to the team to decide what elements of the Scrum they can adopt right away and what they would improvise. Scrum relies on the Sprint Retrospectives to "inspect and adapt" - to review whether the improvisations worked and what corrections are needed.
In some teams, the team manager plays the role of the Product Owner until a full-time one is hired, since the team manager is probably communicating with the necessary stakeholders. In other teams, the Project Manager or the Product Manager temporarily plays the role of the Product Owner.
In the absence of a full time Scrum Master, some teams select their QA lead to take on the role until a full time is hired. Team lead or other team members can also alternate as Scrum Master. Team can also rotate the role for a sprint among the members.
The associated cost of team members taking on multiple roles is lower than not having a process until all necessary roles are hired.
Scrum provides a standard framework - the teams should be flexible enough to adopt some of it and improve upon the rest sprint by sprint to make a quality product, not to make a quality process.
No comments:
Post a Comment