Re: Why does Scrum has a role for PO?
>If a Scrum Team was self-managing, then it would make sense to eliminate the role of Product Owner. However, Scrum indicates the Team is SELF-ORGANIZING, a subtle, but important difference.
> Scrum team is cross-functional and self-managed. Why it's not the team itself decide what
> needs to be built (product backlog) and on what sequence (prioritize on business value)?
> why the team should make commitment to the PO instead of setting the goal for
> themselves and review the status by themselves? Why Scrum define a separate role for PO?
I also believe if you remove the Product Owner, you unbalance the Scrum framework. The three roles in Scrum provide a reasonable check-and-balance (a concept familiar to folks in the US) on one another. The Product Owner is responsible for the business outcomes and the Team provides the product. When there is no Product Owner (or a very weak or uninvolved one), the Scrum gets unbalanced and the business needs and delivery of business value take a back seat to the pursuit of interesting technology.
- --- In email@example.com, "gregc" <greg@...> wrote:
>You must have some great stories to tell. Have you ever written any of it down?Hi Greg, Thanks. No, I have not found the time to do any writing but it is certainly something I'd love to find time for.
(But then if I was really writing I wouldn't be able to start sentences with 'but' and end with prepositions. ;)