TMCnet News
Six pitfalls to avoid when implementing Scrum [ITWeb](ITWeb Via Acquire Media NewsEdge) Scrum/Agile is a radically different set of nimble, customer-driven, outcome-orientated and iterative management practices, the proper exploitation of which can have a dramatic and positive effect on software development productivity. However, organisations can easily minimise the benefits of pursuing this initiative; so the following are six of the pitfalls of implementing Scrum that should be avoided at all costs. * Introducing the change as just another business process. Scrum is a fundamental transformation of the way work is managed in a company and is thus a new way of thinking, speaking and acting in the workplace for both managers and workers. Those managing the work have to shift from being controllers of individuals to enablers of self-organising teams with responsibility for establishing priorities in a timely fashion and removing impediments as they are identified, rather than controlling each worker. On the other hand, those doing the work have to shift from being individuals reporting to bosses in accordance with a big plan, to having the responsibility and accountability of delivering work as part of a self-organising team and doing the work in short cycles without interruption from any manager. This is a radical transition for most individuals and unlike a bureaucracy, everyone becomes accountable. * Top management hedging its bets. It is vital that management embraces this new approach from the outset and supports it as the implementation proceeds. For example, adhering to release dates regardless of the content of the release, reinforces the principles of delivering early and often, reducing waste. * Rigidly applying a methodology conceived elsewhere. Some firms try to implement Scrum as a rigid methodology with no allowance made for the different requirements of different contexts. If it's implemented with the exact terminologies, job descriptions and procedures that have been worked out in other organisations, this can lead to considerable friction as the externally grown ideas don't fit exactly the new environment. By contrast, a company should build on what has been learned in other organisations and adapt it to their own context. * Micromanaging the change. The Scrum/Agile philosophy implies a shift in the traditional role of managers from controllers of individuals to enablers of self-organising teams working in short iterations. It involves creating the space where those doing the work have the autonomy to apply their full talents and creativity to producing something that will delight the customer. In effect, the customer becomes the boss. For many managers and workers, these are very significant changes. If the shift itself is imposed from above, there is a considerable risk that the new approach will be misinterpreted as a continuation of top-down command-and-control management By contrast, the implementation should be modelled on the new management philosophy of direction-setting and enablement, rather than detailed control and led by a cross-functional team that was dedicated to making the change happen. * Keeping key management decisions secret. Hierarchical bureaucracy is notoriously non-transparent and each layer of the bureaucracy tends to tell the layer above and the layer below what it wants to hear, rather than everything it needs to know. In this context, finding out what's really going on depends on access to informal networks. When Scrum is introduced into such a context, the risk of miscommunication and misunderstanding is high. The principle of total openness should be embraced so that for instance, all of the daily meetings are held in a public place so that everyone could see how things were progressing and the task board also displayed in a public place so that everyone can share information with everyone, thus allowing them to adapt on a daily basis to what is happening. * Skimping on training and coaching. Independent studies have shown that the provision of external coaches has a high payoff in terms of team productivity; although traditional management tends to ignore such studies because the mental model is that the managers are responsible for productivity. When the very future of the organisation depends on success, skimping on coaching can be a highly counterproductive form of economising. In the same way, skimping on training or the using unlicensed Coaches is a recipe for disaster and there are numerous examples of exactly this happening. Despite studies showing that the provision of external coaches has a high payoff in terms of team productivity, traditional management have tended to ignore this because they think their responsibility is limited to productivity; this couldn't be further from the truth. Mandy Schoeman, the founder and Managing Director of Scrum Solutions, is the only Scrum.Org Certified Trainer and Agile Coach on the African continent. She is one of a select few trainers approved by Ken Schwaber (co-inventor of Scrum and the Scrum.org founder) to deliver Scrum.org curriculums. Apart from being a Scrum.Org Implementations Coach, Professional Scrum Trainer and Professional Scrum Master, Schoeman also is a Scrum Alliance Certified Scrum Master, Certified Scrum Product Owner, Certified Microsoft Trainer and Qualified FET with experience in software analysis and design, software testing, quality control and technical writing. Ken Schwaber is the co-inventor of Scrum and the founder of Scrum.org. He is one of the original signatories of the Agile Manifesto, founder of the Agile Alliance and the Scrum Alliance and says of Schoeman: "She is an amazing coach who knows the secret to teaching complex Agile concepts in a fun and easy environment." (c) 2014 ITWeb Limited. All rights reserved. Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. (Syndigate.info). |