I face in nearly every team the challenge to find the right balance between letting the team organize itself and moderating/ vulgo "leading the ceremony" ;) - I would very much see a discussion of you guys about this "balancing".
@blogfrei, we appreciate your comment and suggestion. Balance is key, isn’t it! I would like to more facilitating in contrast to moderating, but your point is taken! This would be a very good topic for a new video. Thank you!
If the whole point of Agile is to put people and results over process, then forcing Scrum processes would run counter to that objective. Scrum is a framework to be used as a best-practice, but ultimately the needs of the team and the organization should take priority. I’ve heard the term ‘Scrum-but’ often enough from people who feel the need to keep the process pure. Sometimes the need to guide people back into a disciplined cadence is important. Mostly, that term reveals a lack if truly understanding the goals of Agile and Scrum. Serve the people and the organization first.
@Benivere! “people over process” indeed! Forcing frameworks, processes, tools and “best-practices” rarely has the outcomes organizations and teams want. Hopefully the point of the video isn’t missed! It’s often Scrum Masters that are lacking in their effectiveness in leading by serving their teams and organizations. They get caught up in “doing Scrum” and stunt the growth of the team by thinking every problem that surfaces is theirs to solve. I love your final words - “Serve the people and the organization first.” This sounds like the kind of leader a Scrum Master is really intended to be. Thank you for your comment, @Benivere1!
@@ResponsiveAdvisors question, as in, how would you address a micromanager who was masquerading his lack of relinquishing control and excessive tracking as promoting transparency?
@@TheDOS That's a good one and also a big topic. Since its difficult to get more context over a youtube comment, let me start here: Micromanagement from a boss or team lead often comes when trust is lacking. In general, you find people trustworthy that demonstrate honesty, reliability and competence. When you don't trust an employee and cannot fire them you might be tempted to dig into the internals of what they're doing in hopes of solving the problem or squashing your discomfort in what they’re doing which is leading to your lack of trust in them. Scrum done well builds trust. Starting here, Scrum promotes honesty. In Sprint Planning a Scrum team should be setting appropriate Sprint goals (the SMART format is good here) and not biting off more than they can chew while building the Sprint Backlog to avoid the waste that comes from overplanning. In Sprint reviews, a Scrum team demonstrates the solution they created to satisfy the Sprint Goal as they collaborate with Stakeholders to find ways to improve the product for the next Sprint. The solution demonstrated in Sprint Review (the Increment) should be safe, usable, releasable and meets organizational quality standards because it meets the Definition of Done. Doing this consistently every single Sprint demonstrates competence and reliability. So back to the manager, they could just be a jerk. But I would start with the above. Is the Scrum team living up to the accountability described in the Scrum Guide? Are they demonstrating honesty, reliability, and competence on a regular basis? If so, have you talked to the manager in question about their micromanagement and attempted a productive conversation that reduces that impression from the team but also addresses the needs of the boss who has been micromanaging? No micromanaging boss wants to be one, they would rather sleep well at night and feel comfortable taking vacation days.
Wow. Great video. The no.1 was a weak one though. Need to send it back to backlog. I feel positive even when criticising, scrum attitude I guess 😅 Though the scrum master role seems to be quite obsolete if the team truly follows scrum. Is that why I nowadays see solutions architect or product owner or someone multitasking the scrum role alongside other works. What are your thoughts on that?
No. 1 was weak?! 😅 I love some good stakeholder criticism (feedback)… We will inspect and adapt. A Team that truly follows Scrum is at level one of their evolution. They have the basics of using Scrum. That’s wonderful! Questions that need to be asked though: 1. Is the Scrum Team creating Done value every Sprint? 2. How is this value being measured? 3. Are Sprint Goals value driven? 4. Do Sprint Goals align with the Product Goal? 5. Is there any friction to the Innovation and Delivery pipeline? 6. Does the organization and Scrum Team know the difference between deterministic and probabilistic forecasting for work? And so many many more questions could be asked. The Scrum Master influence and mastery extends to the organization and anything affecting the product and Scum Teams. A good Scrum Master knows this. Innovative organizations appreciate the value of someone who takes ownership and is accountable for increased effectiveness. So, what do you think, @prakashbhetwal1365? Your comment is relevant and the opinion of the Scrum Master role, as being unnecessary, is quite common.
@@ResponsiveAdvisors Got it! The scrum master is not just relevant but infact important for continuous measurements, alignment, guidance, and so on. Complete agreement that ownership is important. Thanks Coach 😀!
I face in nearly every team the challenge to find the right balance between letting the team organize itself and moderating/ vulgo "leading the ceremony" ;) - I would very much see a discussion of you guys about this "balancing".
@blogfrei, we appreciate your comment and suggestion. Balance is key, isn’t it! I would like to more facilitating in contrast to moderating, but your point is taken!
This would be a very good topic for a new video. Thank you!
If the whole point of Agile is to put people and results over process, then forcing Scrum processes would run counter to that objective.
Scrum is a framework to be used as a best-practice, but ultimately the needs of the team and the organization should take priority.
I’ve heard the term ‘Scrum-but’ often enough from people who feel the need to keep the process pure. Sometimes the need to guide people back into a disciplined cadence is important. Mostly, that term reveals a lack if truly understanding the goals of Agile and Scrum.
Serve the people and the organization first.
@Benivere! “people over process” indeed! Forcing frameworks, processes, tools and “best-practices” rarely has the outcomes organizations and teams want.
Hopefully the point of the video isn’t missed! It’s often Scrum Masters that are lacking in their effectiveness in leading by serving their teams and organizations. They get caught up in “doing Scrum” and stunt the growth of the team by thinking every problem that surfaces is theirs to solve.
I love your final words - “Serve the people and the organization first.” This sounds like the kind of leader a Scrum Master is really intended to be.
Thank you for your comment, @Benivere1!
Keep pumping content I love it
Thanks! we're happy you're enjoying it! more to come!
Love the hardware!!!
Thanks, @irisalane! :)
Transparency vs micromanagement?
Is this a question or a comment?
@@ResponsiveAdvisors question, as in, how would you address a micromanager who was masquerading his lack of relinquishing control and excessive tracking as promoting transparency?
@@TheDOS That's a good one and also a big topic. Since its difficult to get more context over a youtube comment, let me start here: Micromanagement from a boss or team lead often comes when trust is lacking. In general, you find people trustworthy that demonstrate honesty, reliability and competence. When you don't trust an employee and cannot fire them you might be tempted to dig into the internals of what they're doing in hopes of solving the problem or squashing your discomfort in what they’re doing which is leading to your lack of trust in them.
Scrum done well builds trust. Starting here, Scrum promotes honesty. In Sprint Planning a Scrum team should be setting appropriate Sprint goals (the SMART format is good here) and not biting off more than they can chew while building the Sprint Backlog to avoid the waste that comes from overplanning. In Sprint reviews, a Scrum team demonstrates the solution they created to satisfy the Sprint Goal as they collaborate with Stakeholders to find ways to improve the product for the next Sprint. The solution demonstrated in Sprint Review (the Increment) should be safe, usable, releasable and meets organizational quality standards because it meets the Definition of Done. Doing this consistently every single Sprint demonstrates competence and reliability.
So back to the manager, they could just be a jerk. But I would start with the above. Is the Scrum team living up to the accountability described in the Scrum Guide? Are they demonstrating honesty, reliability, and competence on a regular basis? If so, have you talked to the manager in question about their micromanagement and attempted a productive conversation that reduces that impression from the team but also addresses the needs of the boss who has been micromanaging? No micromanaging boss wants to be one, they would rather sleep well at night and feel comfortable taking vacation days.
Wow. Great video. The no.1 was a weak one though. Need to send it back to backlog. I feel positive even when criticising, scrum attitude I guess 😅
Though the scrum master role seems to be quite obsolete if the team truly follows scrum. Is that why I nowadays see solutions architect or product owner or someone multitasking the scrum role alongside other works.
What are your thoughts on that?
No. 1 was weak?! 😅 I love some good stakeholder criticism (feedback)… We will inspect and adapt.
A Team that truly follows Scrum is at level one of their evolution. They have the basics of using Scrum. That’s wonderful! Questions that need to be asked though:
1. Is the Scrum Team creating Done value every Sprint?
2. How is this value being measured?
3. Are Sprint Goals value driven?
4. Do Sprint Goals align with the Product Goal?
5. Is there any friction to the Innovation and Delivery pipeline?
6. Does the organization and Scrum Team know the difference between deterministic and probabilistic forecasting for work?
And so many many more questions could be asked. The Scrum Master influence and mastery extends to the organization and anything affecting the product and Scum Teams. A good Scrum Master knows this. Innovative organizations appreciate the value of someone who takes ownership and is accountable for increased effectiveness.
So, what do you think, @prakashbhetwal1365? Your comment is relevant and the opinion of the Scrum Master role, as being unnecessary, is quite common.
@@ResponsiveAdvisors Got it! The scrum master is not just relevant but infact important for continuous measurements, alignment, guidance, and so on. Complete agreement that ownership is important.
Thanks Coach 😀!