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

scrum master with a non technical background

Expand Messages
  • poojawandile
    Hi, I would like to hear from forum members: Does it help to have a scum master on a team without technical background, does he/she adds value to the team?
    Message 1 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,

      I would like to hear from forum members:

      "Does it help to have a scum master on a team without technical
      background, does he/she adds value to the team?"

      IMO:

      Having a scrum master with techncial background definately is a big
      plus. He/she can help in resolving technical issues. Once the team has
      matured and understands scrum ceremonies there is not much value add
      from a scrum master. Day in day out the team is struggling in getting
      the issues resolved and focusing on sprint deliverables. For most the
      time they are interacting with the technical expert and since that
      person resolves their issues eventually helping them in completing their
      deliverables, he gets more visibility/credibility as against the SM. The
      role of a SM just gets confined to a process consultant and hence lacks
      visibility as well as credibility.

      Any takers on this?

      thanks,,

      pooja
    • Alan Dayley
      Good question. The ScrumMaster is a team coach, not a player.  The ScrumMaster is to care for and improved the performance of the team.  Sometimes technical
      Message 2 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Good question.
        The ScrumMaster is a team coach, not a player.  The ScrumMaster is to
        care for and improved the performance of the team.  Sometimes
        technical knowledge can be an asset to accomplish this goal.
        Sometimes it could be a liability if he gets wrapped up in technical
        things instead of the team. So it depends, doesn't it.

        An interesting tangent discussion of this topic is a thread from some
        time back: "Compelling case for dedicated ScrumMaster"
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/32026?var=1

        Alan

        On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, poojawandile <poojawandile@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Hi,
        >
        > I would like to hear from forum members:
        >
        > "Does it help to have a scum master on a team without technical
        > background, does he/she adds value to the team?"
        >
        > IMO:
        >
        > Having a scrum master with techncial background definately is a big
        > plus. He/she can help in resolving technical issues. Once the team has
        > matured and understands scrum ceremonies there is not much value add
        > from a scrum master. Day in day out the team is struggling in getting
        > the issues resolved and focusing on sprint deliverables. For most the
        > time they are interacting with the technical expert and since that
        > person resolves their issues eventually helping them in completing their
        > deliverables, he gets more visibility/credibility as against the SM. The
        > role of a SM just gets confined to a process consultant and hence lacks
        > visibility as well as credibility.
        >
        > Any takers on this?
        >
        > thanks,,
        >
        > pooja
        >
        >
      • John Goodsen
        Personally speaking, a ScrumMaster that cannot coach technical skills also is rarely a full-time role, because most of the work in the day is technical. A
        Message 3 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Personally speaking, a ScrumMaster that cannot coach technical skills also is rarely a full-time role, because most of the work in the day is technical.  A good coach should be able to play the game they are coaching.  How many great sports coaches do you know that never played the game themselves first?  If you're going to equate a SM to coach, then a good SM can do the technical coaching and knows how to build software.

          I am astonished at how many CSM's I've met that can't write code.  I've seen them try to "coach" teams and make a friggin' technical mess as a result.  The title Scrumaster seems to be turning into a euphanism for "manager who can't get a job without a certificate" from my obervations ... and the reason I even write this is because while the Scrum Alliance pops out a gazillion CSM's each year because it makes them money, the Scrum community as a whole is a dilution of Agile.

          I often think how perverted the notion of scrum master is and how many layed-off managers have paid good money to get that certification as a last-ditch resort to stay employed.  I've interviewed dozens now and rarely find a qualified applicant.

          John

          On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Alan Dayley <alandd@...> wrote:
          Good question.
          The ScrumMaster is a team coach, not a player.  The ScrumMaster is to
          care for and improved the performance of the team.  Sometimes
          technical knowledge can be an asset to accomplish this goal.
          Sometimes it could be a liability if he gets wrapped up in technical
          things instead of the team.  So it depends, doesn't it.

          An interesting tangent discussion of this topic is a thread from some
          time back: "Compelling case for dedicated ScrumMaster"
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/32026?var=1

          Alan

          On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, poojawandile <poojawandile@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          > Hi,
          >
          > I would like to hear from forum members:
          >
          > "Does it help to have a scum master on a team without technical
          > background, does he/she adds value to the team?"
          >
          > IMO:
          >
          > Having a scrum master with techncial background definately is a big
          > plus. He/she can help in resolving technical issues. Once the team has
          > matured and understands scrum ceremonies there is not much value add
          > from a scrum master. Day in day out the team is struggling in getting
          > the issues resolved and focusing on sprint deliverables. For most the
          > time they are interacting with the technical expert and since that
          > person resolves their issues eventually helping them in completing their
          > deliverables, he gets more visibility/credibility as against the SM. The
          > role of a SM just gets confined to a process consultant and hence lacks
          > visibility as well as credibility.
          >
          > Any takers on this?
          >
          > thanks,,
          >
          > pooja
          >
          >


          ------------------------------------

          To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
          To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links

          <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
             http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/

          <*> Your email settings:
             Individual Email | Traditional

          <*> To change settings online go to:
             http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/join
             (Yahoo! ID required)

          <*> To change settings via email:
             scrumdevelopment-digest@yahoogroups.com
             scrumdevelopment-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

          <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
             scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
             http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




          --
          John Goodsen                 RADSoft / Better Software Faster
          jgoodsen@...            Lean/Agile/XP/Scrum Coaching and Training
          http://www.radsoft.com          Ruby on Rails and Java Solutions
        • woynam
          Huh? The team is responsible for the technical practices, not the SM. The SM s role is to ensure that the *process* is being followed, not that the product is
          Message 4 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            Huh? The team is responsible for the technical practices, not the SM. The SM's role is to ensure that the *process* is being followed, not that the product is technically sound. If the process is being followed, it will be rather apparent if the technical foundation is getting the job done.

            Whether it's a full time job really depends on the team, and the impediments. If the team is well-versed in the process, then less time will be required coaching. However, a large number of impediments may still take up a lot of time.

            There are plenty of coaches that haven't played professionally, and yet manage to lead their teams to victory. I'm a golfer. How many tournaments have Butch Harmon, and Hank Haney won? Too few to count.

            Mark

            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, John Goodsen <jgoodsen@...> wrote:
            >
            > Personally speaking, a ScrumMaster that cannot coach technical skills also
            > is rarely a full-time role, because most of the work in the day is
            > technical. A good coach should be able to play the game they are coaching.
            > How many great sports coaches do you know that never played the game
            > themselves first? If you're going to equate a SM to coach, then a good SM
            > can do the technical coaching and knows how to build software.
            >
            > I am astonished at how many CSM's I've met that can't write code. I've seen
            > them try to "coach" teams and make a friggin' technical mess as a result.
            > The title Scrumaster seems to be turning into a euphanism for "manager who
            > can't get a job without a certificate" from my obervations ... and the
            > reason I even write this is because while the Scrum Alliance pops out a
            > gazillion CSM's each year because it makes them money, the Scrum community
            > as a whole is a dilution of Agile.
            >
            > I often think how perverted the notion of scrum master is and how many
            > layed-off managers have paid good money to get that certification as a
            > last-ditch resort to stay employed. I've interviewed dozens now and rarely
            > find a qualified applicant.
            >
            > John
            >
            > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Alan Dayley <alandd@...> wrote:
            >
            > > Good question.
            > > The ScrumMaster is a team coach, not a player. The ScrumMaster is to
            > > care for and improved the performance of the team. Sometimes
            > > technical knowledge can be an asset to accomplish this goal.
            > > Sometimes it could be a liability if he gets wrapped up in technical
            > > things instead of the team. So it depends, doesn't it.
            > >
            > > An interesting tangent discussion of this topic is a thread from some
            > > time back: "Compelling case for dedicated ScrumMaster"
            > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/message/32026?var=1
            > >
            > > Alan
            > >
            > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 3:40 AM, poojawandile <poojawandile@...>
            > > wrote:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Hi,
            > > >
            > > > I would like to hear from forum members:
            > > >
            > > > "Does it help to have a scum master on a team without technical
            > > > background, does he/she adds value to the team?"
            > > >
            > > > IMO:
            > > >
            > > > Having a scrum master with techncial background definately is a big
            > > > plus. He/she can help in resolving technical issues. Once the team has
            > > > matured and understands scrum ceremonies there is not much value add
            > > > from a scrum master. Day in day out the team is struggling in getting
            > > > the issues resolved and focusing on sprint deliverables. For most the
            > > > time they are interacting with the technical expert and since that
            > > > person resolves their issues eventually helping them in completing their
            > > > deliverables, he gets more visibility/credibility as against the SM. The
            > > > role of a SM just gets confined to a process consultant and hence lacks
            > > > visibility as well as credibility.
            > > >
            > > > Any takers on this?
            > > >
            > > > thanks,,
            > > >
            > > > pooja
            > > >
            > > >
            > >
            > >
            > > ------------------------------------
            > >
            > > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
            > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
            > > scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            > --
            > John Goodsen RADSoft / Better Software Faster
            > jgoodsen@... Lean/Agile/XP/Scrum Coaching and Training
            > http://www.radsoft.com Ruby on Rails and Java Solutions
            >
          • John Goodsen
            ... better know how to golf if I m going to pay them to coach me. A scrum master that doesn t know how to write software is of limited usefulness in my book.
            Message 5 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:17 PM, woynam <woyna@...> wrote:

              Huh? The team is responsible for the technical practices, not the SM. The SM's role is to ensure that the *process* is being followed, not that the product is technically sound. If the process is being followed, it will be rather apparent if the technical foundation is getting the job done.

              Whether it's a full time job really depends on the team, and the impediments. If the team is well-versed in the process, then less time will be required coaching. However, a large number of impediments may still take up a lot of time.

               
              There are plenty of coaches that haven't played professionally, and yet manage to lead their teams to victory. I'm a golfer. How many tournaments have Butch Harmon, and Hank Haney won? Too few to count.

              I didn't say they had to have a wall of trophies, but they damned well better know how to golf if I'm going to pay them to coach me.  A scrum master that doesn't know how to write software is of limited usefulness in my book.   I'll take a coach that knows how to code over a scrum master any day.  There aren't many around for everybody to have, so we've seen this role called Scrumaster become the crutch, and daree I say a ploy to sell certification training to people who often have no business being involved on a software project - at least the dozens of archealogically-challenged-just-got-my-certification-cuz-I-got-layed-off-managers that I've been running into the last couple years.

              ... and I realize I'm prolly trolling because this *is* a Scrum list ... and you know how I like to rile up the troops  :-)

              --
              John Goodsen                 RADSoft / Better Software Faster
              jgoodsen@...            Lean/Agile/XP/Scrum Coaching and Training
              http://www.radsoft.com          Ruby on Rails and Java Solutions

            • Adam Sroka
              I have always been suspicious of Scrummasters. If there are a lot of organizational obstacles and they are effective in removing them then they are worth their
              Message 6 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                I have always been suspicious of Scrummasters. If there are a lot of
                organizational obstacles and they are effective in removing them then
                they are worth their weight in gold. However, there is a tendency to
                devolve in one of two directions:

                1) The team is highly effective and therefore the scrummaster role is
                superfluous.

                2) The obstacles that the team encounters are not of a kind that the
                scrummaster can effectively remove because of lack of skill,
                direction, or resources.

                In the first case I wish that Scrum teams more often had the courage
                to realize that scrummaster need not be a permanent role for an
                individual on a team. At some point I would expect a mature Agile team
                to realize that everyone is a facilitator/obstacle-remover and
                therefore it isn't special.

                For the second problem I think it is necessary to coach scrummasters
                to more effectively identify where they can provide help and when to
                ask for it themselves. It also behooves an organization that wants to
                reap the benefits of Agile teams to make available resources (Such as
                coaching or other expertise) for the scrummaster to turn to.

                On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:37 PM, John Goodsen <jgoodsen@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                >
                > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:17 PM, woynam <woyna@...> wrote:
                >>
                >> Huh? The team is responsible for the technical practices, not the SM. The SM's role is to ensure that the *process* is being followed, not that the product is technically sound. If the process is being followed, it will be rather apparent if the technical foundation is getting the job done.
                >>
                >> Whether it's a full time job really depends on the team, and the impediments. If the team is well-versed in the process, then less time will be required coaching. However, a large number of impediments may still take up a lot of time.
                >>
                >
                >>
                >> There are plenty of coaches that haven't played professionally, and yet manage to lead their teams to victory. I'm a golfer. How many tournaments have Butch Harmon, and Hank Haney won? Too few to count.
                >>
                > I didn't say they had to have a wall of trophies, but they damned well better know how to golf if I'm going to pay them to coach me.  A scrum master that doesn't know how to write software is of limited usefulness in my book.   I'll take a coach that knows how to code over a scrum master any day.  There aren't many around for everybody to have, so we've seen this role called Scrumaster become the crutch, and daree I say a ploy to sell certification training to people who often have no business being involved on a software project - at least the dozens of archealogically-challenged-just-got-my-certification-cuz-I-got-layed-off-managers that I've been running into the last couple years.
                >
                > ... and I realize I'm prolly trolling because this *is* a Scrum list ... and you know how I like to rile up the troops  :-)
                >
                > --
                > John Goodsen                 RADSoft / Better Software Faster
                > jgoodsen@...            Lean/Agile/XP/Scrum Coaching and Training
                > http://www.radsoft.com          Ruby on Rails and Java Solutions
                >
                >
              • Adam Sroka
                I didn t really finish that thought: It is not necessary for scrummasters to be technical to be useful to a team if that team has obstacles that the
                Message 7 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  I didn't really finish that thought:

                  It is not necessary for scrummasters to be technical to be useful to a
                  team if that team has obstacles that the scrummaster can remove. It is
                  necessary for teams that have newly adopted Agile to have technical
                  advisers, because there are technical implications to working in
                  smaller, faster increments.

                  A technical coach is an important part of any successful Agile
                  adoption, but other experts of various kinds are also useful, and a
                  savvy scrummaster can be useful in identifying opportunities to direct
                  those efforts to maximum effect. A scrummaster need not know too much
                  about any particular aspect to do that, although being an effective
                  leader (notice that I didn't say "manager") is vital.

                  On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Adam Sroka <adam.sroka@...> wrote:
                  > I have always been suspicious of Scrummasters. If there are a lot of
                  > organizational obstacles and they are effective in removing them then
                  > they are worth their weight in gold. However, there is a tendency to
                  > devolve in one of two directions:
                  >
                  > 1) The team is highly effective and therefore the scrummaster role is
                  > superfluous.
                  >
                  > 2) The obstacles that the team encounters are not of a kind that the
                  > scrummaster can effectively remove because of lack of skill,
                  > direction, or resources.
                  >
                  > In the first case I wish that Scrum teams more often had the courage
                  > to realize that scrummaster need not be a permanent role for an
                  > individual on a team. At some point I would expect a mature Agile team
                  > to realize that everyone is a facilitator/obstacle-remover and
                  > therefore it isn't special.
                  >
                  > For the second problem I think it is necessary to coach scrummasters
                  > to more effectively identify where they can provide help and when to
                  > ask for it themselves. It also behooves an organization that wants to
                  > reap the benefits of Agile teams to make available resources (Such as
                  > coaching or other expertise) for the scrummaster to turn to.
                  >
                  > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:37 PM, John Goodsen <jgoodsen@...> wrote:
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:17 PM, woynam <woyna@...> wrote:
                  >>>
                  >>> Huh? The team is responsible for the technical practices, not the SM. The SM's role is to ensure that the *process* is being followed, not that the product is technically sound. If the process is being followed, it will be rather apparent if the technical foundation is getting the job done.
                  >>>
                  >>> Whether it's a full time job really depends on the team, and the impediments. If the team is well-versed in the process, then less time will be required coaching. However, a large number of impediments may still take up a lot of time.
                  >>>
                  >>
                  >>>
                  >>> There are plenty of coaches that haven't played professionally, and yet manage to lead their teams to victory. I'm a golfer. How many tournaments have Butch Harmon, and Hank Haney won? Too few to count.
                  >>>
                  >> I didn't say they had to have a wall of trophies, but they damned well better know how to golf if I'm going to pay them to coach me.  A scrum master that doesn't know how to write software is of limited usefulness in my book.   I'll take a coach that knows how to code over a scrum master any day.  There aren't many around for everybody to have, so we've seen this role called Scrumaster become the crutch, and daree I say a ploy to sell certification training to people who often have no business being involved on a software project - at least the dozens of archealogically-challenged-just-got-my-certification-cuz-I-got-layed-off-managers that I've been running into the last couple years.
                  >>
                  >> ... and I realize I'm prolly trolling because this *is* a Scrum list ... and you know how I like to rile up the troops  :-)
                  >>
                  >> --
                  >> John Goodsen                 RADSoft / Better Software Faster
                  >> jgoodsen@...            Lean/Agile/XP/Scrum Coaching and Training
                  >> http://www.radsoft.com          Ruby on Rails and Java Solutions
                  >>
                  >>
                  >
                • Ron Jeffries
                  ... Yes ... what I d ask is whether what you re doing is likely to get you what you want ... whatever that is. Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com
                  Message 8 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hello, John. On Thursday, June 10, 2010, at 5:37:23 PM, you wrote:

                    > ... and I realize I'm prolly trolling because this *is* a Scrum list ... and
                    > you know how I like to rile up the troops :-)

                    Yes ... what I'd ask is whether what you're doing is likely to get
                    you what you want ... whatever that is.

                    Ron Jeffries
                    www.XProgramming.com
                    www.xprogramming.com/blog
                    I must create a system, or be enslaved by another man's;
                    I will not reason and compare; my business is to create. --William Blake
                  • John Goodsen
                    yeah I think so. whatever it was ... :-) ... -- John Goodsen RADSoft / Better Software Faster jgoodsen@radsoft.com
                    Message 9 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
                    • 0 Attachment
                      yeah I think so. whatever it was ... :-)

                      On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                      Hello, John.  On Thursday, June 10, 2010, at 5:37:23 PM, you wrote:

                      > ... and I realize I'm prolly trolling because this *is* a Scrum list ... and
                      > you know how I like to rile up the troops  :-)

                      Yes ... what I'd ask is whether what you're doing is likely to get
                      you what you want ... whatever that is.

                      Ron Jeffries
                      www.XProgramming.com
                      www.xprogramming.com/blog
                      I must create a system, or be enslaved by another man's;
                      I will not reason and compare; my business is to create. --William Blake



                      ------------------------------------

                      To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                      To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links

                      <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                         http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/

                      <*> Your email settings:
                         Individual Email | Traditional

                      <*> To change settings online go to:
                         http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/join
                         (Yahoo! ID required)

                      <*> To change settings via email:
                         scrumdevelopment-digest@yahoogroups.com
                         scrumdevelopment-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                      <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                         scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                      <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                         http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




                      --
                      John Goodsen                 RADSoft / Better Software Faster
                      jgoodsen@...            Lean/Agile/XP/Scrum Coaching and Training
                      http://www.radsoft.com          Ruby on Rails and Java Solutions
                    • Hariprakash Agrawal
                      Hi Pooja / All, I agree with John but same time, its very person dependent. If team is already in to agile or scrum (not scum) for some time and there is not
                      Message 10 of 10 , Jun 10, 2010
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi Pooja / All,

                        I agree with John but same time, its very person dependent. If team is already in to agile or scrum (not scum) for some time and there is not much impediments than its better to have person technically sound and if person is good technically and helps others, its highly likely that person will have good respect among team members which is essential for such roles.

                        In my opinion, any day, soft skills wins over technical skills when it comes to leadership roles, like, SMs, coaches, managers etc. Hence if person is only good technically but does not share/help others than it would be a bad idea to have such member in team itself, forget about scrum master.

                        I am currently coaching 2 teams on agile (it is mix of Scrum and XP practices plus our collective experience) and for initial role-out, we have identified SMs who are good in both (soft + hard skills) but we are not always lucky to get such individuals. When I am coaching these new things, team has lots of suspicious/doubts/queries and sometimes, my life is easier if SM pitches in to explain things and there are 2 influential votes on one side.

                        --
                        Regards,
                        Hariprakash Agrawal (Hari),
                        http://opcord.com - OpCord provides process consulting, trainings and testing services for organizations. For individuals and corporate trainings/certifications on Agile, CMMi, Risk Management, Software Engineering, Six Sigma, Testing etc, please check our schedule at http://opcord.com/index.php/calendar.html.
                        About me: http://www.linkedin.com/in/hariprakash


                        On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Adam Sroka <adam.sroka@...> wrote:
                        I didn't really finish that thought:

                        It is not necessary for scrummasters to be technical to be useful to a
                        team if that team has obstacles that the scrummaster can remove. It is
                        necessary for teams that have newly adopted Agile to have technical
                        advisers, because there are technical implications to working in
                        smaller, faster increments.

                        A technical coach is an important part of any successful Agile
                        adoption, but other experts of various kinds are also useful, and a
                        savvy scrummaster can be useful in identifying opportunities to direct
                        those efforts to maximum effect. A scrummaster need not know too much
                        about any particular aspect to do that, although being an effective
                        leader (notice that I didn't say "manager") is vital.

                        On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Adam Sroka <adam.sroka@...> wrote:
                        > I have always been suspicious of Scrummasters. If there are a lot of
                        > organizational obstacles and they are effective in removing them then
                        > they are worth their weight in gold. However, there is a tendency to
                        > devolve in one of two directions:
                        >
                        > 1) The team is highly effective and therefore the scrummaster role is
                        > superfluous.
                        >
                        > 2) The obstacles that the team encounters are not of a kind that the
                        > scrummaster can effectively remove because of lack of skill,
                        > direction, or resources.
                        >
                        > In the first case I wish that Scrum teams more often had the courage
                        > to realize that scrummaster need not be a permanent role for an
                        > individual on a team. At some point I would expect a mature Agile team
                        > to realize that everyone is a facilitator/obstacle-remover and
                        > therefore it isn't special.
                        >
                        > For the second problem I think it is necessary to coach scrummasters
                        > to more effectively identify where they can provide help and when to
                        > ask for it themselves. It also behooves an organization that wants to
                        > reap the benefits of Agile teams to make available resources (Such as
                        > coaching or other expertise) for the scrummaster to turn to.
                        >
                        > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:37 PM, John Goodsen <jgoodsen@...> wrote:
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>
                        >> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:17 PM, woynam <woyna@...> wrote:
                        >>>
                        >>> Huh? The team is responsible for the technical practices, not the SM. The SM's role is to ensure that the *process* is being followed, not that the product is technically sound. If the process is being followed, it will be rather apparent if the technical foundation is getting the job done.
                        >>>
                        >>> Whether it's a full time job really depends on the team, and the impediments. If the team is well-versed in the process, then less time will be required coaching. However, a large number of impediments may still take up a lot of time.
                        >>>
                        >>
                        >>>
                        >>> There are plenty of coaches that haven't played professionally, and yet manage to lead their teams to victory. I'm a golfer. How many tournaments have Butch Harmon, and Hank Haney won? Too few to count.
                        >>>
                        >> I didn't say they had to have a wall of trophies, but they damned well better know how to golf if I'm going to pay them to coach me.  A scrum master that doesn't know how to write software is of limited usefulness in my book.   I'll take a coach that knows how to code over a scrum master any day.  There aren't many around for everybody to have, so we've seen this role called Scrumaster become the crutch, and daree I say a ploy to sell certification training to people who often have no business being involved on a software project - at least the dozens of archealogically-challenged-just-got-my-certification-cuz-I-got-layed-off-managers that I've been running into the last couple years.
                        >>
                        >> ... and I realize I'm prolly trolling because this *is* a Scrum list ... and you know how I like to rile up the troops  :-)
                        >>
                        >> --
                        >> John Goodsen                 RADSoft / Better Software Faster
                        >> jgoodsen@...            Lean/Agile/XP/Scrum Coaching and Training
                        >> http://www.radsoft.com          Ruby on Rails and Java Solutions
                        >>
                        >>
                        >


                        ------------------------------------

                        To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links

                        <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
                           http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/

                        <*> Your email settings:
                           Individual Email | Traditional

                        <*> To change settings online go to:
                           http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/join
                           (Yahoo! ID required)

                        <*> To change settings via email:
                           scrumdevelopment-digest@yahoogroups.com
                           scrumdevelopment-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

                        <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                           scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                        <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
                           http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



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