Re: Solutions (Software) Architect: on the "team" or off?
- Well said!
Ultimately the health of the team is more important than any individual,
no matter how knowledgeable s/he may be.
And, as others have said too, both patterns will work with people who
have the right attitude.
--- In email@example.com, Peter Stevens <peterstev@...>
> Hi Doug,
> I would take your lumps and move on.
> There are two reasons for this:
> 1. A person with negative vibes can make the entire team unhappy.
> team never really functions as a team, so productivity andquality
> (and job satisfaction) suffer as a result. They'll blame Scrumor
> the Scrum-Master or both.fully
> 2. An external consultant is a chicken, i.e. someone who is not
> committed and responsible for the goals of the team. The riskis
> high that because of the chicken, you won't get to done by theend
> of the sprint.he
> My experience has been that it is better to keep the responsibility in
> the team, but agree that the external consultant/architect will be
> available to help. If he really is a value-add, he'll be asked
> (repeatedly) to help and provide value. If not, he will quickly fade
> from the scene. In any case, this facilitates a know-how transfer from
> the senior to the junior. When the junior is ready to fly on his own,
> In 4 cases out of 5, I would expect the external consultant to fade
> quickly from the scene, but of course, each case is an individual case
> and your mileage may vary :-)
> Doug Roberts schrieb:
> > Howdy All,
> > The 6 person Development Team that I serve (I'm the SM) is now in
> > its 5th sprint and we've had some philosophical differences within
> > the Team that have resulted in some bitter feelings, and now the
> > senior-most member wants off the Team. He feels that his
> > credibility on the Team has been irreparably damaged. This senior
> > member has, by far, the deepest knowledge of the product that this
> > Team develops on but he has many very firm beliefs about system
> > architecture as well as 'how' things should be developed that the
> > rest of the Team doesn't share. This senior Team member has asked
> > to be removed from the Team.
> > I have asked this senior Team member about what he wants to do once
> > he's off the Team, and he does recognize that an excellent growth
> > opportunity for him would be to work his way into a Solutions (or
> > Software) Architect role. But I see several difficulties with this:
> > how can he be off the Team yet still serve the Team as a Solutions
> > (Software) Architect, and how will the Team react to him serving in
> > this role? My understanding of Best Practice for a well-run Scrum
> > Team is that we 'design as we go' and that the designing is done by
> > Team members.
> > I truly would hate to lose this senior Team member's expertise and
> > knowledge of the product should he be completely removed from the
> > Team. But I also fear the Team's reaction if this Team member is
> > now in a role where he can dictate to the Team how their solutions
> > should be designed. My question to the group is this: have any of
> > you had a 'healthy' Scrum Team where the Solutions (Software)
> > Architect is not a member of the Team?
> > Many thanks, as always, for your shared thoughts and experiences.
> > Doug
> Peter Stevens, CSM
> tel: +41 44 586 6450