Scrum Is Not Enough!

Let me start by saying I’m a big advocate of scrum (despite some of my posts in which I challenge it over and over again). Having said that it has it’s weaknesses (like any process), one I’m going to highlight in this post is the insular nature of some scrum teams.

The best way to explain this is to describe my own experience. When I started in the Scrum Master role I was very keen on continuous delivery and wanted the development team to produce a build every two weeks which could be supplied to the business to decide whether to deploy it or not.

We had a lot of projects on at the time and we were working very hard to meet the commitments my predecessor had signed us up to and get features out the door on time.

This went on for a month or two, we hit every deadline in the calendar and provided the builds to the deployment teams on the dates we’d agreed. So what happened? Nothing…

What I’d failed to realise was that despite our hard work over the last few months we’d failed to release a single new feature to a customer. The deployment teams had struggled to install our software into UAT and without any contingency (except when it was carefully planned for) we had no capacity to assist them or pick up any issues – until the next planning session of course (where usually the next feature was the most urgent due to “customer commitments”).

Development kept on working, features continued to be produced and deadlines were hit. But the customers were sat waiting, UATs couldn’t be completed (or in some cases even installed), and the business because frustrated with us because we weren’t available to help them get the product out the door.

So what went wrong?

This is where you may have to forgive my sleight of hand in the title. I don’t believe the problem was with the scrum methodology as such, merely the most common implementations of it. The first oversight was the handover, the second was the goals of the team. Let me explain…

Firstly the handover, the issue wasn’t that it was sloppy or that it we didn’t have consistent priorities across the business (although that certainly didn’t help). The issue was that we had one… A scrum team should contain all the skills and knowledge required to get a feature from concept to customer. Rather than handing builds over to the business to deploy we should have had someone from the deployment team working in the scrum team who would actually do the implementation. The team itself would then support the new feature through it’s UAT phases and out into the customer’s live environment.

The second failing I mentioned was the team goals. I have already alluded to this but the goal of the team was to “write this feature” whereas it should have been “deliver this feature to the customer”. Only once that goal has been met should they move onto the next one.

This continuity and accountability is a very powerful thing. Projects fail when departments don’t communicate with each other or their priorities are not aligned. Systems slow when there’s too much Work in Process (for example incomplete UATs) clogging up the pipeline and generating unplanned work. If you want to break out of this cycle you need to stop thinking about departments and handovers. Stop thinking of scrum teams as groups of developers delivering feature after feature and start thinking of projects being created and delivered by teams of people from all the disciplines you need.

If you can do that, then you can make your scrum team work for the business and not only for it’s own productivity.

Measuring Sprint Velocity is Useless Unless You Ship!

I’ve recently been reading The Goal by Eli Goldratt, in it Alex Rogo (the Plant Manager) boasts to an old teacher of his that the new robots they’ve installed have greatly increased their efficiency. The Yodaesque Jonah then promptly proves his data worthless and sets Alex on the path to enlightenment.

What struck me however was how clearly this mirrors the software industry. The Goal has been the go-to book for managers for years but only with the relatively recent release of books like The Phoenix Projext have the applications to software industries been recognised.

It’s a well established idea to model a software development team like a factory. Time and money goes in, features and fixes come out. In the story Alex was delighted that his robots had given him an increased efficiency for making a particular part of the process, it was only when Jonah pointed out that the robots did not result in any increase in sales that he saw the problem in his logic.

So, let’s imagine that our software business is Alex’s factory. We’ve brought in a robot to do the work of the Development Team and Sprint Velocity has gone up from 100 Story Points to 300. As the Development Manager you get to pat yourself on the back, celebrate your success, and go home at the end of the day.

But what happens to your release at the end of your Sprint? Is your product stacked up on your factory floor awaiting the next machine (perhaps your deployment or infrastructure team)? Or have you sold it and added value to your business?

This may seem like false measurement, your numbers are telling you that you’re delivering but the reality is very different. The truth however is even worse, unshipped features are the software equivalent of Work in Progress, they’re the half finished products sat on your factory floor taking up time and space. Until your business can deliver them they’ll continue to come back and haunt you, injecting unplanned work into your Sprints and sucking time out of your Development Team.

So, If your Sprint Velocity measurements only take into account the work pushed through your Development Team then you’re not measuring the value you’re adding to the business, you’re making the same mistake as Rogo and only considering one part of the system. You may be getting great results, but are you helping achieve the goal!?