Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Product Owner as Scrum Coach

Expand Messages
  • Pierre Mengal
    Hello, I m wondering if some of you have experience in some project where the Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching both the
    Message 1 of 19 , Nov 29, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello,
       
      I'm wondering if some of you have experience in some project where the Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching both the team (including the Scrum Master) to implement Scrum.
       
      Thanks
       
      Pierre
    • Jørn A Hansen
      ... I think you should take very careful steps *if* you try to do this. Have you looked for alternative ways like bringing in an outside coach, hiring an
      Message 2 of 19 , Nov 29, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        On Nov 29, 2007 2:04 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:
        > I'm wondering if some of you have experience in some project where the
        > Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching both
        > the team (including the Scrum Master) to implement Scrum.

        I think you should take very careful steps *if* you try to do this.
        Have you looked for alternative ways like bringing in an outside
        coach, hiring an already experienced Scrum Master or sending the Scrum
        Master to some education?

        There is this experience report on InfoQ though that might give you some ideas:
        http://www.infoq.com/presentations/alexia-bowers-agile-leadership

        Jørn
      • Tom Mellor
        Nothing wrong with this as long as the Product Owner plays by the Product Owner rules and doesn t interfere. You really don t want the SM and the PO to be one
        Message 3 of 19 , Nov 29, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Nothing wrong with this as long as the Product Owner plays by the
          Product Owner rules and doesn't interfere. You really don't want the
          SM and the PO to be one in the same person, though. Also, the
          ScrumMaster needs to be able to go to someone besides the PO/Scrum
          Coach, especially if there are PO issues to address and he or she
          needs some advice and coaching on how to deal with that.

          --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Pierre Mengal" <pierre@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Hello,
          >
          > I'm wondering if some of you have experience in some project where
          the
          > Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching
          both
          > the team (including the Scrum Master) to implement Scrum.
          >
          > Thanks
          >
          > Pierre
          >
        • Pierre Mengal
          Scrum Master Certification is a good introduction to scrum, that is. IMHO, if you want to implement Scrum, you need a lot of time and experiments OR an
          Message 4 of 19 , Nov 29, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Scrum Master Certification is a good introduction to scrum, that is.
             
            IMHO, if you want to implement Scrum, you need a lot of time and experiments OR an experienced Scrum Coach in the team for at least the first few weeks of the project.
             
            Scrum Coach are becoming very difficult to find. Today I can't find any...
             
            Pierre

            On Nov 29, 2007 8:11 PM, Jørn A Hansen <jornhansen@...> wrote:

            On Nov 29, 2007 2:04 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:
            > I'm wondering if some of you have experience in some project where the
            > Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching both
            > the team (including the Scrum Master) to implement Scrum.

            I think you should take very careful steps *if* you try to do this.
            Have you looked for alternative ways like bringing in an outside
            coach, hiring an already experienced Scrum Master or sending the Scrum
            Master to some education?

            There is this experience report on InfoQ though that might give you some ideas:
            http://www.infoq.com/presentations/alexia-bowers-agile-leadership

            Jørn


          • Vikrama Dhiman
            Is this something thats possible within Art of the possible realms - sure! I know of a SCRUM trainer/ coach who plays a product owner [and a good one too] at
            Message 5 of 19 , Nov 30, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Is this something thats possible within "Art of the possible" realms - sure!

              I know of a SCRUM trainer/ coach who plays a product owner [and a good one too] at a big Internet portal. I also play the role of SCRUM trainer/ coach and Product Owner as well for teams in our organization. Here are some things I keep in mind and I am sure by inspecting and adapting I will get better at balancing the role:

              1. Either I am coaching or playing product owner but not both - so I keep the coaching/ training time separate
              2. An additional time kept for discussion with SCRUM Master only on specific instances I note/ they bring up but both roles not played at the same time
              3. As a SCRUM coach I am not responsible for project success but guide team on SCRUM values and principles and pointing out what they could try and do better
              4. What I find very effective is to mix the training courses/ coaching sessions with the teams for whom I am not playing Product Owner - this way I am able to focus from a different perspective and the team members/ SMs as well

              That said, sometimes this slightly Jekyll and Hyde aspect does not work as beautifully. I try and push the boundaries as PO to see how team does even when I don't need to but fortunately so far PO role has not clouded coaching aspect so far [or I hope so].

              I think it would really depend on how good the person playing the roles is [as is almost everything else].

              Disclaimer: I am not a certified scrum coach/ trainer - only a CSM so far.

              Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:
              Scrum Master Certification is a good introduction to scrum, that is.
               
              IMHO, if you want to implement Scrum, you need a lot of time and experiments OR an experienced Scrum Coach in the team for at least the first few weeks of the project.
               
              Scrum Coach are becoming very difficult to find. Today I can't find any...
               
              Pierre

              On Nov 29, 2007 8:11 PM, Jørn A Hansen <jornhansen@gmail. com> wrote:
              On Nov 29, 2007 2:04 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@mengal. be> wrote:
              > I'm wondering if some of you have experience in some project where the
              > Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching both
              > the team (including the Scrum Master) to implement Scrum.

              I think you should take very careful steps *if* you try to do this.
              Have you looked for alternative ways like bringing in an outside
              coach, hiring an already experienced Scrum Master or sending the Scrum
              Master to some education?

              There is this experience report on InfoQ though that might give you some ideas:
              http://www.infoq. com/presentation s/alexia- bowers-agile- leadership

              Jørn



              Be a better sports nut! Let your teams follow you with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.

            • Basharat Wani
              Well, I see that there will be a huge conflict of interest if the Product Owner acts as a scrum Master also Basharat ... From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Message 6 of 19 , Nov 30, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Well, I see that there will be a huge conflict of interest if the
                Product Owner acts as a scrum Master also


                Basharat


                -----Original Message-----
                From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tom Mellor
                Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 9:21 PM
                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                Nothing wrong with this as long as the Product Owner plays by the
                Product Owner rules and doesn't interfere. You really don't want the SM
                and the PO to be one in the same person, though. Also, the ScrumMaster
                needs to be able to go to someone besides the PO/Scrum Coach, especially
                if there are PO issues to address and he or she needs some advice and
                coaching on how to deal with that.

                --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                <mailto:scrumdevelopment%40yahoogroups.com> , "Pierre Mengal"
                <pierre@...>
                wrote:
                >
                > Hello,
                >
                > I'm wondering if some of you have experience in some project where
                the
                > Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching
                both
                > the team (including the Scrum Master) to implement Scrum.
                >
                > Thanks
                >
                > Pierre
                >
              • Pierre Mengal
                Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?
                Message 7 of 19 , Nov 30, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?

                  On Nov 30, 2007 2:26 PM, Basharat Wani <bbw@...> wrote:



                  Well, I see that there will be a huge conflict of interest if the
                  Product Owner acts as a scrum Master also

                  Basharat




                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  [mailto: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tom Mellor
                  Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 9:21 PM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                  Nothing wrong with this as long as the Product Owner plays by the
                  Product Owner rules and doesn't interfere. You really don't want the SM
                  and the PO to be one in the same person, though. Also, the ScrumMaster
                  needs to be able to go to someone besides the PO/Scrum Coach, especially
                  if there are PO issues to address and he or she needs some advice and
                  coaching on how to deal with that.

                  --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  <mailto:scrumdevelopment%40yahoogroups.com> , "Pierre Mengal"

                  <pierre@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > Hello,
                  >
                  > I'm wondering if some of you have experience in some project where
                  the
                  > Product Owner also acted as the Scrum Coach in the project, coaching
                  both
                  > the team (including the Scrum Master) to implement Scrum.
                  >
                  > Thanks
                  >
                  > Pierre
                  >


                • Emiliano Heyns
                  ... The sole interest cannot be the success of the project if the implied undercurrent is at any cost the PO will not personally feel . The Scrum Master
                  Message 8 of 19 , Dec 3, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:
                    Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?

                    The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                    So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                    Emile

                  • Pierre Mengal
                    I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible tests (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline.
                    Message 9 of 19 , Dec 3, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.
                       
                      He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".
                       
                      However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".
                       
                      This is two different things for me.
                       
                      Pierre

                       
                      On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@...> wrote:

                      On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:
                      Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?

                      The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                      So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                      Emile


                    • Roy Morien
                      which begs the obvious questions ... Deliver what in time? Who decided the time? What realistic connection is there between on time and what must be
                      Message 10 of 19 , Dec 3, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        which begs the obvious questions ... Deliver what in time? Who decided the time? What realistic connection is there between 'on time' and what must be delivered by the deadline? Did anyone really know at the time that the deadline was stated what actually was required?
                         
                        When will we be rid of such fools in our profession?

                        Regards,
                        Roy Morien



                        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                        From: pierre@...
                        Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:18:32 +0100
                        Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                        I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.
                         
                        He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".
                         
                        However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".
                         
                        This is two different things for me.
                         
                        Pierre

                         
                        On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@ iris-advies. nl> wrote:

                        On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@mengal. be> wrote:
                        Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?

                        The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                        So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                        Emile







                        Listen now! New music from the Rogue Traders.
                      • Della-Croce, Greg
                        One of the first things that struck me about SCRUM and Agile is the statement that Quality is not negotiable . Maybe your PO needs to be reminded that if you
                        Message 11 of 19 , Dec 3, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment

                          One of the first things that struck me about SCRUM and Agile is the statement that “Quality is not negotiable”.  Maybe your PO needs to be reminded that if you don’t test (Unit, System, and Acceptance) that all they are going to get is the best and worst guesses that your developer team can make, and that only leads to more “do over”.  “Do over” are a bigger waste of time than testing!!

                           

                          Greg

                           

                          Ready   Fire   Aim

                          Getting the Right  Job Done Right the Right Way in the Right Time

                           

                          From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Pierre Mengal
                          Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 9:19 AM
                          To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                          Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                           

                          I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.

                           

                          He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".

                           

                          However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".

                           

                          This is two different things for me.

                           

                          Pierre


                           

                          On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@...> wrote:

                          On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:

                          Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?


                          The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                          So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                          Emile

                           

                           

                        • Wolfgang Schulze Zachau
                          Gents, if Scrum is done properly, then the PO has no say into how the team deliver their stuff. The Scrum Master is responsible for ensuring that they deliver
                          Message 12 of 19 , Dec 3, 2007
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Gents,
                             
                            if Scrum is done properly, then the PO has no say into how the team deliver their stuff. The Scrum Master is responsible for ensuring that they deliver DONE stories. He is also responsible for ensuring that the team doesn't overcommit and he needs to ensure that the PO doesn't interfere with the team.
                            For any non-team member test are, as a matter of course, a waste, because they do not directly increase the functionality delivered. For developers, they should be an essential, as without them they cannot guarantee that their stories are DONE. Which is exactly why the Scrum Master must ensure that once the team have settled on a definition of DONE, they stick with it.
                            In other words: in this case the PO deserves to have his knuckles rapped. Properly.
                             

                            Regards,

                            Wolfgang

                             


                            From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Pierre Mengal
                            Sent: 03 December 2007 14:19
                            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                            Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                            I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.
                             
                            He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".
                             
                            However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".
                             
                            This is two different things for me.
                             
                            Pierre

                             
                            On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@ iris-advies. nl> wrote:

                            On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@mengal. be> wrote:
                            Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?

                            The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                            So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                            Emile


                          • Matt
                            ... deliver ... You mean no say other than nixing the project because it is no longer feasible given the estimates that the team delivered? Or (if the PO is
                            Message 13 of 19 , Dec 3, 2007
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Wolfgang Schulze Zachau"
                              <wolfgang@...> wrote:
                              > if Scrum is done properly, then the PO has no say into how the team
                              deliver
                              > their stuff.

                              You mean "no say" other than nixing the project because it is no longer
                              feasible given the estimates that the team delivered? Or (if the PO is
                              also the business owner) nixing the team and starting over with a new
                              team? (admittedly one that will be set up for failure from day 1)

                              >In other words: in this case the PO deserves to have his knuckles
                              rapped. Properly.

                              While a rapping of the knuckles is sure to be communicative, it might be
                              better to have a sit down and explain *why* the team is defining DONE as
                              including tests etc. It shouldn't be too difficult to explain in a way
                              that makes good business sense... particularly since it *does* make
                              good business sense to test properly right?

                              Matt
                            • Pierre Mengal
                              What is the most sad is that hey really have to go live the 1st of January. This is a very important project and they may loose a lot more than the cost of the
                              Message 14 of 19 , Dec 4, 2007
                              • 0 Attachment

                                What is the most sad is that hey really have to go live the 1st of January. This is a very important project and they may loose a lot more than the cost of the overall development process.

                                This is what make me mad...

                                On Dec 3, 2007 4:10 PM, Roy Morien <roymorien@...> wrote:

                                which begs the obvious questions ... Deliver what in time? Who decided the time? What realistic connection is there between 'on time' and what must be delivered by the deadline? Did anyone really know at the time that the deadline was stated what actually was required?
                                 
                                When will we be rid of such fools in our profession?

                                Regards,
                                Roy Morien



                                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                From: pierre@...
                                Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 15:18:32 +0100
                                Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                                I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.
                                 
                                He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".
                                 
                                However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".
                                 
                                This is two different things for me.
                                 
                                Pierre

                                 
                                On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@...> wrote:

                                On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:
                                Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?

                                The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                                So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                                Emile







                                Listen now! New music from the Rogue Traders.


                              • Pierre Mengal
                                What make me stuck in Agile in general is that some look at waterfall geeks and say to themselves: guys you don t know it yet,... you are so wrong... . Not a
                                Message 15 of 19 , Dec 4, 2007
                                • 0 Attachment

                                  What make me stuck in Agile in general is that some look at waterfall geeks and say to themselves: "guys you don't know it yet,... you are so wrong...".

                                  Not a very nice attitude.

                                  On Dec 3, 2007 4:13 PM, Della-Croce, Greg <greg_della-croce@...> wrote:

                                  One of the first things that struck me about SCRUM and Agile is the statement that "Quality is not negotiable".  Maybe your PO needs to be reminded that if you don't test (Unit, System, and Acceptance) that all they are going to get is the best and worst guesses that your developer team can make, and that only leads to more "do over".  "Do over" are a bigger waste of time than testing!!

                                   

                                  Greg

                                   

                                  Ready   Fire   Aim

                                  Getting the Right  Job Done Right the Right Way in the Right Time

                                   

                                  From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Pierre Mengal
                                  Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 9:19 AM
                                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                  Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                                   

                                  I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.

                                   

                                  He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".

                                   

                                  However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".

                                   

                                  This is two different things for me.

                                   

                                  Pierre


                                   

                                  On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@...> wrote:

                                  On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:

                                  Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?


                                  The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                                  So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                                  Emile

                                   

                                   


                                • Roy Morien
                                  There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying guys, you are so wrong provided you are able to demonstrate how, where and why they are so wrong, and provide
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Dec 4, 2007
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying 'guys, you are so wrong' provided you are able to demonstrate how, where and why they are so wrong, and provide an alternative that is demonstrably correct.
                                     
                                    If we always tippy toed around trying not to hurt everybodies' feelings by saying nothing, then progress in thinking will never happen.

                                    Or you have the situation as I was in when a 'nice person' was telling me how, really, I was not wrong, just different, and everybody was entitled to their own opinion. So nice. But when I said, ok, if I am just different, why don't we do it my way for a change, after 10 years of doing it your way? Well, that was just a little too radical, and my suggestion was rejected.

                                    Regards,
                                    Roy Morien


                                    To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                    From: pierre@...
                                    Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 09:22:56 +0100
                                    Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                                    What make me stuck in Agile in general is that some look at waterfall geeks and say to themselves: "guys you don't know it yet,... you are so wrong...".
                                    Not a very nice attitude.

                                    On Dec 3, 2007 4:13 PM, Della-Croce, Greg <greg_della-croce@ wycliffe. org> wrote:

                                    One of the first things that struck me about SCRUM and Agile is the statement that "Quality is not negotiable".  Maybe your PO needs to be reminded that if you don't test (Unit, System, and Acceptance) that all they are going to get is the best and worst guesses that your developer team can make, and that only leads to more "do over".  "Do over" are a bigger waste of time than testing!!
                                     

                                    Greg
                                     
                                    Ready   Fire   Aim
                                    Getting the Right  Job Done Right the Right Way in the Right Time
                                     
                                    From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Pierre Mengal
                                    Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 9:19 AM
                                    To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                                    Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                                     
                                    I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.
                                     
                                    He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".
                                     
                                    However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".
                                     
                                    This is two different things for me.
                                     
                                    Pierre

                                     
                                    On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@ iris-advies. nl> wrote:

                                    On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@mengal. be> wrote:

                                    Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?


                                    The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                                    So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                                    Emile

                                     

                                     







                                    Sell your car for just $30 at CarPoint.com.au. It's simple!
                                  • Pierre Mengal
                                    Roy, While I really think you honestly believe in what you say, but it seems obvious to me that Agile is not for anyone in the world. At Scrum Gathering, I
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Dec 4, 2007
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Roy,
                                       
                                      While I really think you honestly believe in what you say, but it seems obvious to me that Agile is not for anyone in the world.
                                       
                                      At Scrum Gathering, I heard some really great discussions with guys from a big companies explaining me why Agile did not work in some countries. Because of cultural differences.
                                       
                                      They are not ALL "so wrong", I think, like you, that most of them are. This is the difference.
                                       
                                      Pierre
                                      On Dec 4, 2007 9:45 AM, Roy Morien <roymorien@...> wrote:

                                      There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying 'guys, you are so wrong' provided you are able to demonstrate how, where and why they are so wrong, and provide an alternative that is demonstrably correct.
                                       
                                      If we always tippy toed around trying not to hurt everybodies' feelings by saying nothing, then progress in thinking will never happen.

                                      Or you have the situation as I was in when a 'nice person' was telling me how, really, I was not wrong, just different, and everybody was entitled to their own opinion. So nice. But when I said, ok, if I am just different, why don't we do it my way for a change, after 10 years of doing it your way? Well, that was just a little too radical, and my suggestion was rejected.

                                      Regards,
                                      Roy Morien

                                      Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 09:22:56 +0100

                                      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                                      What make me stuck in Agile in general is that some look at waterfall geeks and say to themselves: "guys you don't know it yet,... you are so wrong...".
                                      Not a very nice attitude.

                                      On Dec 3, 2007 4:13 PM, Della-Croce, Greg <greg_della-croce@...> wrote:

                                      One of the first things that struck me about SCRUM and Agile is the statement that "Quality is not negotiable".  Maybe your PO needs to be reminded that if you don't test (Unit, System, and Acceptance) that all they are going to get is the best and worst guesses that your developer team can make, and that only leads to more "do over".  "Do over" are a bigger waste of time than testing!!
                                       

                                      Greg
                                       
                                      Ready   Fire   Aim
                                      Getting the Right  Job Done Right the Right Way in the Right Time
                                       
                                      From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Pierre Mengal
                                      Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 9:19 AM
                                      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach

                                       
                                      I have a case where the PO want to drop all possible "tests" (because it is a waste for him), ask developers to do extra hours, etc... to meet the deadline. All classical mistakes.
                                       
                                      He has the same objective as the team: "deliver on time".
                                       
                                      However he is probably wrong on "how to deliver on time".
                                       
                                      This is two different things for me.
                                       
                                      Pierre

                                       
                                      On Dec 3, 2007 2:50 PM, Emiliano Heyns <Emiliano.Heyns@...> wrote:

                                      On Nov 30, 2007 3:12 PM, Pierre Mengal <pierre@...> wrote:

                                      Conflict of interest ? All the actors are not supposed to have the same interest ? The success of the project ?


                                      The sole interest cannot be "the success of the project" if the implied undercurrent is "at any cost the PO will not personally feel". The Scrum Master might have to instill a sense of reality in the PO. If the PO is driving the team to a non-sustainable pace, and the team doesn't pick up on this (and it's easy to lose track of this if you're in the middle of it all), the SM must intervene.

                                      So yes, it can be a conflict of interest. In the example above, the project interest conflicts with the company interest (there's little value in burnt-out employees).

                                      Emile

                                       

                                       







                                      Sell your car for just $30 at CarPoint.com.au. It's simple!


                                    • nummer_81
                                      ... was not wrong, just different, ... just different, why don t we ... too radical, and my ... Interesting. I totally fail to see the success of your strategy
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Dec 4, 2007
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        On Mar Dec 4 9:45 , Roy Morien <roymorien@...> sent:


                                        > If we always tippy toed around trying not to hurt everybodies' feelings by saying
                                        > nothing, then progress in thinking will never happen.
                                        >
                                        > Or you have the situation as I was in when a 'nice person' was telling me how, really, I
                                        was not wrong, just different,
                                        > and everybody was entitled to their own opinion. So nice. But when I said, ok, if I am
                                        just different, why don't we
                                        > do it my way for a change, after 10 years of doing it your way? Well, that was just a little
                                        too radical, and my
                                        > suggestion was rejected.

                                        Interesting. I totally fail to see the success of your strategy in that situation...

                                        The "nice person" didn't "make progress in thinking" and you didn't get your suggestions
                                        accepted. Seems to be a loss for everybody...

                                        What you wrote first makes perfect sense to me:

                                        [out of order]
                                        > There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying 'guys, you are so wrong' provided you are
                                        > able to demonstrate how, where and why they are so wrong, and provide an alternative
                                        > that is demonstrably correct.

                                        But somehow, in practice, this rarely seems to work. As (IMO) your example demonstrates.

                                        Cheers

                                        Jerome
                                      • Wolfgang Schulze Zachau
                                        OK, let me clarify this a little. Yes, the PO can stop the project if it is no longer feasible. Yes, the PO can disassemble the team, if it cannot deliver the
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Dec 5, 2007
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          OK, let me clarify this a little.
                                          Yes, the PO can stop the project if it is no longer feasible. Yes, the PO can disassemble the team, if it cannot deliver the results he needs. But then, maybe he should have looked a bit harder (and without the pink shades) at the realities that exist.
                                          I insist that the PO cannot tell the team HOW they deliver what he is asking them to deliver.
                                          The knuckle rapping was meant to be verbal, not literal. And surely any good Scrum Master will try and negotiate first and cajole, persuade, whatever he can conjure up. The underlying motto here should be: a dead Scrum Master is of no use to anyone.
                                          Having said that: if the PO cannot be made to see the light of the day, then you have a lose/lose situation anyway. And that might just be the right time to cut your losses.
                                           
                                          Regarding Pierre's comment that they really have to deliver on the 1st of January: Scrum always delivers on time. The questions simply is: what will be delivered? And it is the PO's job to figure out what are the most important bits to deliver.
                                          Here you have a situation where Scrum simply blows the covers off completely.
                                           

                                          Regards,

                                          Wolfgang

                                           


                                          From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Matt
                                          Sent: 03 December 2007 20:32
                                          To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                          Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Product Owner as Scrum Coach


                                          --- In scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com, "Wolfgang Schulze Zachau"
                                          <wolfgang@.. .> wrote:
                                          > if Scrum is done properly, then the PO has no say into how the team
                                          deliver
                                          > their stuff.

                                          You mean "no say" other than nixing the project because it is no longer
                                          feasible given the estimates that the team delivered? Or (if the PO is
                                          also the business owner) nixing the team and starting over with a new
                                          team? (admittedly one that will be set up for failure from day 1)

                                          >In other words: in this case the PO deserves to have his knuckles
                                          rapped. Properly.

                                          While a rapping of the knuckles is sure to be communicative, it might be
                                          better to have a sit down and explain *why* the team is defining DONE as
                                          including tests etc. It shouldn't be too difficult to explain in a way
                                          that makes good business sense... particularly since it *does* make
                                          good business sense to test properly right?

                                          Matt

                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.