This is the text from a recent announcement for a course by Ken Schwaber on “Flaccid Scrum – A New Pandemic?” (text underlining is mine):
Scrum has been a very widely adopted Agile process, used for managing such complex work as systems development and development of product releases. When waterfall is no longer in place, however, a lot of long standing habits and dysfunctions have come to light. This is particularly true with Scrum, because transparency is emphasized in Scrum projects.
Some of the dysfunctions include poor quality product and completely inadequate development practices and infrastructure. These arose because the effects of them couldnâ€™t be seen very clearly in a waterfall project. In a Scrum project, the impact of poor quality caused by inadequate practices and tooling are seen in every Sprint.
The primary habits that hinder us are flaccid developers and flaccid customers who believe in magic, as in:
Unskilled developers – most developers working in a team are unable to build an increment of product within an iteration. They are unfamiliar with modern engineering and quality practices, and they donâ€™t have an infrastructure supportive of these practices.
Ignorant customer – most customers are still used to throwing a book ofÂ requirements over the wall to development and wait for the slips to start occurring, all the time adding the inevitable and unavoidable changes.
Belief in magic – most customers and managers still believe that if they want something badly enough and pressure developers enough to do it, that it will happen. They donâ€™t understand that the pressure valve is quality and long term product sustainability and viability.
Have you seen these problems? Is your company “tailoring” Scrum to death? Let Ken respond to your issues and questions!
Ken will describe how Scrum addresses these problems and will give us a preview of plans for the future of the Scrum certification efforts.
Here are my observations and thoughts from this synopsis:
- line 2: what does “when waterfall is no longer in place” mean ? So, when waterwall was still in place, there were no issues ??? Somehow, one gets a feeling all the problems came to light only when Waterfall was “no longer in place”…so, why not get waterfall back in its place 🙂
- line 5-6: In a Scrum project, the impact of poor quality caused by inadequate practices and tooling are seen in every Sprint ? …in every Sprint ?….now, wait a minute….I thoughtÂ Scrum project did not have any of these problems because there were no inadequate practices and tooling issues. And you certainly don’t expect to find such issues in every Sprint, or do you ?
- line 7: OK, so now we have an official reason: “flaccid developers” and “flaccid customers” for all ills of the modern world. Wow! I am not sure if that is the best way to build trust either with teams or with customers by fingerpointing and squarely blaming them…without giving them a chance to even speak for themselves. And I thought Srcum was cool about trusting developers, not fixing blame on individuals, interacting with customers…but flacid developers and flaccid customer ??? Does it get any better than this ?
- OK, I will probably agree ‘unskilled developers’ in the context of building an increment of product in an iteration, but what the hell is an ‘ignorant customer’ ? Try telling a customer that you are an ignorant customer…Scrum or no Scrum, you are guaranteed some unsurprising results ! And which Customer paying through his nose waits for the “slips to start occurring” ? In these tough economic times ? Â
- Is your company ‘tailoring’ Scrum to death ? I thought there were only two shades of Scrum – either you did Scrum-per-the-book or you did not. Since Scrum is the modern-day Peter Pan which refuses to grow up, we have only one version of Scrum to play around with, and unless some group of people decide now Scrum can grow to the next version (perhaps more because of commercial interests than anything else, whenever that happens). So, how can one ‘tailor’ Scrum – by any stretch of imagination, that is NOT Scrum. I mean, that is not allowed ! RightÂ ? So, why are we discussing it and wasting timeÂ – we might actually be acknowledging and unknowningly legitimizingÂ that there is a secret world out there where Scrum can be ‘tailored’ and still be called Scrum ! That is sacrilege !
I always hate marketing messages that overpromise miracles, offer snake oil, belittle the intelligence of people, ridicule people…why can’t people simply stick toÂ facts and figures ? Why don’t we talk in a non-intimidating language that encourages people to look up to what is being talked aboutÂ ?Â And in the context of current subject, I doubt Scrum community is going down the right path if its next target is developers and customers. One of them does the work and the other one pays for it.Â Who gives us the right or the data to talk about any of them, in absentiaÂ ? Customers are customers, and even if they are irrational, they are still the customers, and whether paying or not, they alone are going to decide how they will behave. Yes, we might not like it, but isÂ ridiculing them as ‘ignorant customers’ going to turn things into ourÂ favor ? Other industries like retail, hospitality,Â transportation, etc.Â have millions of years of collective experience in managing customers, yetÂ they never break the singlemost cardinal rule of customer service: the customer is always right! And the first chance we software developers get to explain a poorly designed or a bad quality product and rightaway we blame the customers for it ! As if that is not enough, we then look inwards and blame the developers ! GREAT !
I think I will just develop software without blaming anyone else for my mistakes and limitations 🙂Â