One of the primary goals of the first SCRUM was to reduce management
overhead to less than 20% of time for a technical leader. The best
(but not only) SCRUM Master is a technical leader who is coding with
the troops 80% of the time (for the individual SCRUMs).
If you have a SCRUM of SCRUMs, the leader may have more of a
management component, but even there 50% technical work enhances the
ability of the leader to get close to the people doing the
Even a Senior VP who may not be coding can take on the project
management function (it only takes a few minutes a day if you use the
approach described at jeffsutherland.com/scrum), architecture design,
direction, and analysis, oversight of the QA function and how it can
add to the SCRUM process and be automated, R&D, evaluation of new
tools and approaches, and so forth.
SCRUM was designed so that everyone can be doing development and
there are no administrative tasks that take away from it. 60 seconds
a day for developers and 10 minutes a day for the developer who is
the project leader.
In some cases (Ken Schwaber will remember this) senior management was
required to come to the SCRUM meeting to get any reporting at all.
And when they came to the SCRUM, the team would often give them tasks
that they were expected to deliver on.
-- In firstname.lastname@example.org
, "n1xf <n1xf@y...>"
> Hi all,
> I am in the process of researching Scrum for possible adoption on a
> new project that we are starting. We are an ISV with an existing
> product line (for which we shall most likely implement Scrum).
> We are building a team to start this new development and are in
> the "Chaos" of organization (oxymoron?) at this point.
> I am almost done reading Ken & Mike's Book ("Agile Software
> Development with Scrum") and might be jumping the gun here, but
> a question regarding the Scrum Master.