Wolfgang has a very good list of why you should try to get to the
regular release cycle. :)
I agree with all that. Bring it to the attention of the PO. See if
he/she can sort the participation. But I don't think you can just say
"I refuse to co-operate until you agree to a fixed schedule".
Communicate with patience and try to work out a solution.
Senior Process Improvement Manager
SYSOPENDIGIA Plc., Finland
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org
, "Wolfgang Schulze Zachau"
> This is a wonderful example of how Scrum exposes weaknesses in an
> organization, which now has a chance to reconsider various options
> importance of Scrum.
> The very simply answer is: Don't. Do not vary the length of your
> plays havoc with all sorts of things. Your velocity is never really
> clear, people have trouble with committment, your customers cannot
rely on a
> regular cycle of delivery, and the list doesn't stop here. We did
> our troubles only stopped when we stopped modifying sprint length
> other things). It's one of those rules that cannot be bent or broken
> braking the whole thing.
> The underlying problem is that your PO is not committed. If (s)he
> would make sure to be there when needed. If someone has a
> but cannot or won't fulfil it, it shows a lack of accountability and
> committment (or authority, but I don't think that's the case here).
> the question is: why? Is (s)he working fulltime as a PO? Or is this
> of a list of activites for her/him? If yes, why? Does the top brass
> in Scrum? Do they understand how it works? Are they pulling the PO in
> different directions? Or is it the PO herself/himself?
> (and there are more questions to ask).
> And yes, you are right: there is absolutely no point in closing a sprint
> without the PO.
> From: email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Emiliano Heyns
> Sent: 02 October 2007 10:38
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Variable sprint lengths
> I'm wondering what to do about the variability of our sprint lengths. It
> makes it a bit harder to monitor our velocity, but our PO has very
> availability and way too much leave time, so we've had to slightly
> or shorten our sprint lengths so far in order to have the PO present
> review session. How much of an issue is this?
> We're managing so far, but that may be because we're just getting
> on scrum, so we may not be noticing how much we're missing. I can't
> force the PO to be present, however, and closing the sprint without him
> would be pointless.