Search

Agile Filter

How Not To Be Agile -An Effective Product Backlog

IntroductionHello and welcome to this, the third article in the series ‘How Not to be Agile’.‘How Not to be Agile’ may seem a strange title for blogs about how good Agile is!  What I intend to do over this series of articles is to share with you the misinterpretations, omissions, and mistakes that people make that significantly reduce the potential benefits when an organisation, or a part of it, embark on an Agile Transformation.Last time, I discussed the potential pitfalls of not having a suitable Business Case for whatever it is that we are trying to achieve, be it a new product, a major change to an existing product or the Agile transition itself.This time, I will cover some of the misunderstandings and malpractices that I have come across with respect to the next major item to consider in any Agile framework, the requirements.  The most often used term for the requirements list is the Product Backlog from Scrum; I will use this and other Scrum terminology in this article but you can use whatever names you like; it is the content and management of the requirements list that is important.I will start with a description of the Product Backlog process and then give examples of what has and could go wrong if not follows the Product Backlog tips.The Definition of Scrum Product Backlog Having achieved an agreed Vision and Objectives and decided that the Business Case for the product development is viable, the business stakeholders and development team need to discover a list of ‘business requirements’, at the same level of detail, so that the development team can develop the product in a series of short development timeboxes.These ‘requirements’ become Product Backlog Items (PBI). What is a ‘Requirement’?Functional Requirements:There are 3 commonly used ‘structures’ used to express ‘Agile functional requirements’:Elementary Business Processes (EBP) – the names of EBP, usually extracted from the results of the Business Process Modelling exercise concerned with the area of the business that the product is for; for example:                                                                                              ‘Capture Customer Details’Use Cases – from the Unified Modelling Language (UML).  Only the names of the Use Cases, again, usually extracted from the results of Business Process Modelling exercise and the example is the same as for the EBP aboveUser Stories – a technique from eXtreme Programming which states the user of a business process, the name of the process and why the  process is needed; for example:                                                                                                    ‘As a sales person                                                                                  I need to Capture the Customer Details                                                                                        So that payment can be taken’For all the 3 ‘requirements’ types, it is only the names of the business process that are needed (with the addition of the other 2 clauses in User Stories); there should be no lower level details in the PBI.The level of detail for all of the above can be summarised as:                                            ‘The name of one job, being performed by one person, at one time’Non-Functional ‘Requirements’:In addition to the Functional Requirements, the ‘What’, the business will also express the needs of ‘How’ the product will perform such as:All screens must refresh within 5 secondsThe system must be available 24/7/365The system must conform to the company marketing graphic languageand so on and so forth.These Non-Functional ‘requirements’ can be added to the Product Backlog in a separate section from the Functional Requirements or in a separate ‘document’.What A PBI Is NotThere was a fashion, that still exists in some places, to have ‘Technical User Stories’; ‘User Stories’ those name technical activities that need to be done; for example:As a database designer                                                                         I need to create data access scripts                                                     So that the product can store and retrieve the data that it needs to useSuch User Stories would just be stating elements of a team member’s work and do not add anything to the understanding of the business needs which the Product Backlog is meant to represent.It is my strong recommendation that so-called ‘Technical User Stories’ are NOT used because the Product Backlog becomes large, unwieldy, almost impossible to order by business value and prioritisation; the estimated effort for these technical needs are included in the estimation of the ‘business’ PBI; more of which later.It is true that there may be a need for some activities to set-up the technical environment before the development team can start developing the product, some of which are out of the control of the development team; these activities should take place in parallel with creating the initial Product Backlog.Creating a Product BacklogOrdering the Product BacklogThe whole point of Agile is to deliver a product incrementally so that the business can accrue the best value in the shortest possible time.It, therefore, follows that the product needs to be developed by developing the PBI in the business value order; the highest business value PBI first.Therefore, the PBI needs to be ordered by business value. I will not go into the techniques for ordering PBI, they are well documented elsewhere but I will give an example, later, of what happened when one team did not use Product Backlog ordering.Estimating the PBIWe create the initial Product Backlog just after agreeing on the Vision and Objectives and ensuring development viability via the Business CASE  but before development begins; it needs to be estimated in some way to determine how long it may take to develop the product and consequently how much it may cost to develop.It is a tenet of all Agile frameworks that only the development team is allowed to estimate the PBI.  Once done, these estimates will ‘inform’ the Business Case and analysis can be made to see if the original ‘high-level’ estimates in the initial Business Case are of the same order; a decision can be made as to whether the development is still viable.Types of PBI estimatingThere are 2 generally used types of PBI estimating:1. Absolute Estimating:  Whereby each PBI is estimated by how much time it would take go from just its name to ‘potentially shippable’ functionality.  Of course, the tasks include analysis, design, construction and testing and what normally happens is that each ‘skill’ will estimate the time it would take for their part in the process and the times summed to get the overall estimate.2. Relative Estimating:  Whereby the team chooses the PBI which is likely to be ‘the smallest’.“The smallest in what respect?”  you ask.  The ‘smallest’ does not directly consider time; the PBI criteria that are considered are size and complexity.However, opinions of size and complexity will vary amongst all team members depending on their skill and experience; what may seem ‘simple’ to an experienced developer may seem complex to the less experienced person.  Similarly, although the analysis and construction may seem simple, the testing may be complex.For these reasons, it is highly recommended that Relative Estimating is done using ‘Planning Poker’ which is well described elsewhere (see ‘Planning Poker: An Agile Estimating and Planning Technique’); suffice to say here, that once the team have decided which is the ‘smallest’ PBI, they give it a ‘Story Point’ of 1 and all other PBI are estimated with respect to their individual relative size and complexity compared to the ‘smallest’.So which estimating technique to use?1. Absolute Estimating can take a long time; it is akin to the traditional way of estimating for the Project Plan.  Also, it has been established that, generally, we are not very good at estimating in time; the larger the thing we are trying to estimate, the worse our estimates get.  However, the technique is familiar to most people and does not require a change of mindset to produce estimates.2. Relative Estimating requires a totally different mindset amongst the development team members because, initially, not only are they using unfamiliar criteria to estimate the PBI but also, they are estimating in collaboration with other team members with different skill sets and experience.Despite there being ample evidence that Relative Estimating takes less time overall and allows the stakeholders and development team to focus on business benefit being delivered, because of the ‘difficulties’ of introducing Relative Estimating, many teams revert to time estimation and tracking time.  Also, as we will see in one of the Case Studies below, an organisation’s choice of requirements management tool can make the use of Relative Estimating seem a waste of time for team members.Another Potential Problem with Relative EstimatingSo, having carried out ‘Planning Poker’, the development team now know the total number of ‘Story Points’ that the development represents; not much good to the business stakeholders who want to know how long it is going to take and how much it is going to cost.On completion of the initial Product Backlog and before development begins, we need to ‘translate’ this total ‘Story Points’ into time.An Agile Team’s progress is measured by the number of ‘Story Points’ that they deliver in one Sprint; known as the team’s ‘Velocity’.So we need a knowledge of the team’s Velocity in order to establish an estimate of how long the development is likely to take; for example, if the total number of ‘Story Points’ is 200 and the team’s velocity for a 2-week Sprints is 10, then the estimated time to complete all the PBI is:         200 ‘Story Points’ / 10 ‘Story Points per Sprint  x 2 (the number of weeks per Sprint) = 40 weeksHowever, at the start of an Agile transition, we do not know what the team’s Velocity is or will be.  There are 2 methods to determine what the Velocity may be:1. The team takes one of the ‘smallest’ PBI (with a Story Point of 1) and does a traditional break down to the tasks involved and estimate those tasks in time;  1 ‘Story Point’ is equivalent to the time represented by the sum of the times estimated for all the tasksThe team’s Velocity may be estimated by:                                      ‘The number of working days in the Sprint / the estimated days for 1 Story Point’For example, if the ‘time estimate’ for a PBI of 1 ‘Story Point’  is 1 day:                                             10 working days in 2-week Sprint / 1 day = Velocity of 10This velocity can then be used in the formula above to determine the estimate for the potential total time for the development.2. The development team is allowed to start development for 2 or 3 Sprints taking PBI from the top of the Product Backlog.  At the end of the ‘experiment’ period, the total number of ‘Story Points’ for the completed PBI divided by the number of Sprints completed becomes the Velocity to use in the formula above to determine the estimate for the potential total time for the development.The potential problem with this method is that management have to release funds for this experimental period without knowing the values to feed into the Business Case to determine whether the product development is viable before development begins.Once teams have completed 1 product development, we recommend that the team members are kept together for other product developments even though the business area or technology may be different.  Having a team that works well together is more important than creating teams in an ad-hoc manner.  A team’s Velocity varies insignificantly over different product developments and so can be used directly in the formula above to determine the estimate for the potential total time for the development.\Scoping the Product BacklogGenerally, Agile product developments have strict deadlines so that the major benefits can be accrued; benefits such as competitive advantage, meeting marketing needs, meeting customer expectations or complying with regulations.Also, Agile teams comprise all the skills necessary to take the PBI from ‘names’ to a potentially shippable product; not all team members are full-time but the team is fixed.Therefore, generally, the costs for a fixed time product development are also fixed.Given the classic ‘Iron Triangle’ of development variables:If we fix time and cost, then the only thing that can vary is the Requirements that are delivered in the fixed time for the fixed cost.It is quite probable that the initial Product Backlog will contain more PBI than could reasonably be developed in the fixed time available; because the stakeholders/Product Owner has ordered the Backlog by business value, it is relatively straightforward to ‘draw a line’ underneath the lowest PBI in the list that will probably be developed.  We do not remove the lower value PBI because it has been often found during development that a high-value PBI is actually dependant on one of the lower value ones and the ordering has to be amended.Stakeholders need to understand that even though some requirements (PBI) have been requested, it is probable that they will not be delivered.But the Product Backlog scoping does not stop there.  The ‘story Points’ for the PBI are estimates and, by definition, they are not accurate.  In the past, to account for ‘inaccurate’ estimates, organisations have added contingency in time and costs to the estimates.However, in Agile environments where the time and costs are effectively fixed, the development needs some ‘wriggle room’ for when estimates are proved significantly wrong and when requirements change during the development. For an effective Product Backlog, you need to follow Scrum Product Backlog tips.The Minimum Viable Product (MVP)The development team must agree with the Product Owner/Stakeholders which PBI represent the Minimum Viable Product, ie what is the minimum to be delivered in the fixed time in order to accrue the minimum benefit required.There are ‘rules’ how big this MVP can be.  It has been found, from hard-won experience that for a ‘comfortable’ working environment:1. When a team first starts an Agile transformation they should accept PBI in the MVP which represent around 50% to 55% of the estimated effort; ie if there are 200 ‘Story Points’ in the probable PBI, then the MVP should only contain the highest value PBI whose ‘Story Points add up to between 100 and 110.2.When the team and the organisation are reasonably Agile-mature, between 9 months and a year of transformation, the team can accept PBI representing up to 65% of the total estimated effort in the MVP.3.When the team and organisation are fully Agile-mature, PBI representing up to 70% by estimated effort may be accepted in the MVP.  It has been found that no matter how good the teams and organisation are, the variables that come along with all product development make promising more than 70% by estimated effort fraught with problems; the teams must strive not to give stakeholders over-expectations.  The MoSCoW RulesSome Agile Frameworks recommend using a technique called MoSCoW to ‘categorise’ the PBI.  The acronym stands for:Must Haves: Those PBI that is essential to the product; equivalent to the MVP above.Should Haves: Those PBI that is important but there is a workaround for them if they not completed in the fixed timeCould Haves: Those PBI that might be developed if all the Musts and Shoulds have been completed before the end of the fixed timeWon’t Haves:  Those PBI that was initially discovered but was not likely to be completed based on the estimates for the more valuable PBI“The ‘o’s are just for fun”!Using the MoSCoW rules allows the Business Case to be prepared with 3 scenarios:The ‘Best Case’ scenario where all the probable PBI are completed; giving the best benefit in the fixed timeThe ‘Expected Case’ scenario where all the Musts and Shoulds are completed giving the majority of the expected benefits in the fixed timeThe ‘Worst Case’ scenario where only the Musts are delivered giving only the essential expected benefits in the fixed time.Case Study 1:I was working as a business analyst and ‘just-in-time’ Agile trainer/coach for an outsourced team building a replacement system.  The team had 6 full-time business representatives to specify the Agile Requirements (UML Use Cases in this instance).Creation of the Product Backlog went smoothly; a good ‘To-Be’ Business Process Model was created and Use Cases to be included in the new system were identified; there were 92.Unfortunately, I was due to go on 3 weeks holiday, so I briefed the team on how to order the Product Backlog and we ran through some Planning Poker with a few of the Use Cases.When I came back from holiday, I discovered that the team business representatives had had problems in ordering the Product Backlog and had abandoned the attempt because they considered that all the PBI were essential.  Also, the whole team had had problems with Planning Poker because they didn’t know enough about the low-level details.It had been decided to prototype all the Use Cases before estimation and the developers were split into 3 sub-teams for prototyping and the business representatives split into 3 pairs.I had taught the team that the prototyping of any PBI should only go through 3 cycles:1. Investigation where a very rough ‘first draft’ is specified, built and reviewed to make sure that the developers are ‘on the right lines’2.Refinement where the majority of the functionality is specified, built and reviewed3.Consolidation where any ‘tidying-up’ was specified, completed and the complete prototype demonstrated to the wider stakeholder communityIf it takes more than the 3 cycles, then something is wrong with the detailed process being followed.The time taken to produce a prototype should be no more than 2 days but it can be as short as 2 to 3 hours if done in a workshop.Unfortunately, it was decided to pick Use Cases to prototype based on their perceived ‘easiness’ and ‘rotate’ the business representative pairs around the prototype builders such that one pair specified the Investigation, another pair reviewed the Investigation and specified the Refinement and the third pair reviewed the Refinement and specified the Consolidation. At the ‘final’ review, with all 6 business representatives present, the ‘final’ prototypes were significantly different from what was originally specified for the Investigation and ‘recriminations’ took place.  So the prototype developers started again.It had taken 3 weeks to develop the prototypes for 6 PBI!I asked the project manager what his estimate was for completing the prototypes for all the PBI; he calculated that the time that would be necessary was 1 month longer than the specified length of the project.Suffice to say that I worked with the customer representatives to convince them that it would be improbable to complete all the PBI in the fixed time/fixed cost development contract and helped them order the Product Backlog and decide on an MVP. It is worth noting this product development had a Vision, there were no stated objectives nor a visible Business Case.I worked with the developers and business representatives (who were full team members) to ‘play’ Planning Poker.Actual development work started one week later; PBI were completed in the fixed time that equated to approximately 70% of the expected business benefit; a further short project was commissioned to bring the expected business benefit up to 90%.Lessons:1. Do not go on holiday at a crucial time during the product development lifecycle!2. If the Product Backlog is not ordered by business value, significant time will be wasted prototyping PBI of low business value3. If prototyping is to be used, then the whole team should do it together in a workshop; all views will be accessible to all team members and a consensus reached in the minimal amount of time4. If you are an Agile Project Manager/Scrum Master it is your responsibility to keep the team ‘on track’ and to question decisions that may cause a risk to the projectCase Study 2:I had been asked to do some Agile coaching for some teams in a global organisation that was undertaking the Agile transformation of one of their divisions to use SAFe®/Scrum; the transformation had been running for 6 months.  There were 4 teams distributed around the globe doing support work to enable 24-hour coverage for this global organisation.The reasons for SAFe®/Scrum for this transition I covered in my first article.When I arrived Product Backlog requests were arriving daily to the team members from systems users and the individual team member decided whether the requests were important enough to interrupt the work that they were already doing; the Product Owners were not involved in the decision-making process at all.  As a consequence, there were many requests that had been started and abandoned in favour of ‘questionable’ higher priorities and I discovered that some requests had been sent to inappropriate team members, the work would have been better carried out by members of the other global teams.Furthermore, although the teams were doing some Relative Estimating at Sprint Planning (not before), they were focusing on time estimates because that was what the requirements management tool required and what management was tracking progress by.  I shall cover the pitfalls of Sprint Planning in my next article.I started resolving the Product Backlog issues by speaking to all the Product Owners, mostly via video-conferencing, to see if they understood the problems that the current Product Backlog processes were causing.  They did have some understanding but explained that that was the way they worked before the Agile transition and believed that changes to the process were out of their control.I helped them devise a workable process whereby all requests would be sent to  the Product Owners  at a collective address.  They would take turns during a 24-hour period to determine, with Product Managers, the relative priority of new requests against those already on the Backlog.  In addition, once a week, they would ‘get together’ to decide which team would handle any unassigned requests; ‘show-stopper’ requests would be handled as a matter of urgency and handled by whichever team was immediately available and could resolve the issue before their end-of-day.By this process, the Product Owners would gain control of the Product Backlog, there would be less questionable priority decisions and there would be fewer ‘disgruntled’ customers.The process was approved by the Product Managers and all team members apprised of the reasons for the new process and their responsibilities within it.It quickly became obvious at daily Scrums that not all team members were passing all requests that came to them directly from customers to the Product Owners; the process was reiterated to these team members but then the productivity of some of these members decreased significantly.  The cause was that they were still working on their ‘favourite’ customers requests but not reporting it to the rest of the team.The Product Owners then had to analyse the central Change Request system for items that had been completed by their teams but had not appeared on the Product Backlog; the Change Request system was not integrated with the Product Backlogs.Eventually, the ‘lesson’ was learned by ‘miscreant’ team members.Lessons1. Without control of the Product Backlog by the relevant authority (Product Owners), it is impossible to police work to give the best business value to the organisation2. Without control of the Product Backlog, the resolution to some requests may be started and then abandoned in favour of other later requests leaving the customer frustrated3.Estimating by time at the task level wastes a great deal of time; more of which in my next article.ConclusionThe Product Backlog is arguably the most important artifact for product development:The PBI must be ordered by business valueThe PBI must be estimated, preferably by using Planning PokerIts content over time must be controlled by the Product Owner or equivalentTeam members must be closely coached and mentored during the early instigation of process change to ensure their understanding of the need for the change and their compliance

How Not To Be Agile -An Effective Product Backlog

3588
  • by Steve Ash
  • 08th Oct, 2018
  • Last updated on 11th Mar, 2021
How Not To Be Agile -An Effective Product Backlog

Introduction

Hello and welcome to this, the third article in the series ‘How Not to be Agile’.

‘How Not to be Agile’ may seem a strange title for blogs about how good Agile is!  What I intend to do over this series of articles is to share with you the misinterpretations, omissions, and mistakes that people make that significantly reduce the potential benefits when an organisation, or a part of it, embark on an Agile Transformation.

Last time, I discussed the potential pitfalls of not having a suitable Business Case for whatever it is that we are trying to achieve, be it a new product, a major change to an existing product or the Agile transition itself.

This time, I will cover some of the misunderstandings and malpractices that I have come across with respect to the next major item to consider in any Agile framework, the requirements.  The most often used term for the requirements list is the Product Backlog from Scrum; I will use this and other Scrum terminology in this article but you can use whatever names you like; it is the content and management of the requirements list that is important.

I will start with a description of the Product Backlog process and then give examples of what has and could go wrong if not follows the Product Backlog tips.

The Definition of Scrum Product Backlog

Scrum Product

 
Having achieved an agreed Vision and Objectives and decided that the Business Case for the product development is viable, the business stakeholders and development team need to discover a list of ‘business requirements’, at the same level of detail, so that the development team can develop the product in a series of short development timeboxes.

These ‘requirements’ become Product Backlog Items (PBI). 

What is a ‘Requirement’?

Functional Requirements:

There are 3 commonly used ‘structures’ used to express ‘Agile functional requirements’:

Elementary Business Processes (EBP) – the names of EBP, usually extracted from the results of the Business Process Modelling exercise concerned with the area of the business that the product is for; for example:

                                                                                              ‘Capture Customer Details’

Use Cases – from the Unified Modelling Language (UML).  Only the names of the Use Cases, again, usually extracted from the results of Business Process Modelling exercise and the example is the same as for the EBP above
User Stories – a technique from eXtreme Programming which states the user of a business process, the name of the process and why the  process is needed; for example:
                                                                                                    ‘As a sales person
                                                                                  I need to Capture the Customer Details
                                                                                        So that payment can be taken’


For all the 3 ‘requirements’ types, it is only the names of the business process that are needed (with the addition of the other 2 clauses in User Stories); there should be no lower level details in the PBI.
The level of detail for all of the above can be summarised as:

                                            
‘The name of one job, being performed by one person, at one time’

Non-Functional ‘Requirements’:

In addition to the Functional Requirements, the ‘What’, the business will also express the needs of ‘How’ the product will perform such as:

  • All screens must refresh within 5 seconds
  • The system must be available 24/7/365
  • The system must conform to the company marketing graphic language
    and so on and so forth.

These Non-Functional ‘requirements’ can be added to the Product Backlog in a separate section from the Functional Requirements or in a separate ‘document’.

What A PBI Is Not

There was a fashion, that still exists in some places, to have ‘Technical User Stories’; ‘User Stories’ those name technical activities that need to be done; for example:
As a database designer
                                                                         I need to create data access scripts
                                                     So that the product can store and retrieve the data that it needs to use


Such User Stories would just be stating elements of a team member’s work and do not add anything to the understanding of the business needs which the Product Backlog is meant to represent.

It is my strong recommendation that so-called ‘Technical User Stories’ are NOT used because the Product Backlog becomes large, unwieldy, almost impossible to order by business value and prioritisation; the estimated effort for these technical needs are included in the estimation of the ‘business’ PBI; more of which later.

It is true that there may be a need for some activities to set-up the technical environment before the development team can start developing the product, some of which are out of the control of the development team; these activities should take place in parallel with creating the initial Product Backlog.

Creating a Product Backlog

Ordering the Product Backlog

The whole point of Agile is to deliver a product incrementally so that the business can accrue the best value in the shortest possible time.

It, therefore, follows that the product needs to be developed by developing the PBI in the business value order; the highest business value PBI first.

Therefore, the PBI needs to be ordered by business value. I will not go into the techniques for ordering PBI, they are well documented elsewhere but I will give an example, later, of what happened when one team did not use Product Backlog ordering.

Estimating the PBI

We create the initial Product Backlog just after agreeing on the Vision and Objectives and ensuring development viability via the Business CASE  but before development begins; it needs to be estimated in some way to determine how long it may take to develop the product and consequently how much it may cost to develop.

It is a tenet of all Agile frameworks that only the development team is allowed to estimate the PBI.  Once done, these estimates will ‘inform’ the Business Case and analysis can be made to see if the original ‘high-level’ estimates in the initial Business Case are of the same order; a decision can be made as to whether the development is still viable.

Types of PBI estimating

There are 2 generally used types of PBI estimating:

1. Absolute Estimating:  Whereby each PBI is estimated by how much time it would take go from just its name to ‘potentially shippable’ functionality.  Of course, the tasks include analysis, design, construction and testing and what normally happens is that each ‘skill’ will estimate the time it would take for their part in the process and the times summed to get the overall estimate.

2. Relative Estimating:  Whereby the team chooses the PBI which is likely to be ‘the smallest’.

“The smallest in what respect?”  you ask.  The ‘smallest’ does not directly consider time; the PBI criteria that are considered are size and complexity.

However, opinions of size and complexity will vary amongst all team members depending on their skill and experience; what may seem ‘simple’ to an experienced developer may seem complex to the less experienced person.  Similarly, although the analysis and construction may seem simple, the testing may be complex.

For these reasons, it is highly recommended that Relative Estimating is done using ‘Planning Poker’ which is well described elsewhere (see ‘Planning Poker: An Agile Estimating and Planning Technique’); suffice to say here, that once the team have decided which is the ‘smallest’ PBI, they give it a ‘Story Point’ of 1 and all other PBI are estimated with respect to their individual relative size and complexity compared to the ‘smallest’.

So which estimating technique to use?

1. Absolute Estimating can take a long time; it is akin to the traditional way of estimating for the Project Plan.  Also, it has been established that, generally, we are not very good at estimating in time; the larger the thing we are trying to estimate, the worse our estimates get.  However, the technique is familiar to most people and does not require a change of mindset to produce estimates.

2. Relative Estimating requires a totally different mindset amongst the development team members because, initially, not only are they using unfamiliar criteria to estimate the PBI but also, they are estimating in collaboration with other team members with different skill sets and experience.

Despite there being ample evidence that Relative Estimating takes less time overall and allows the stakeholders and development team to focus on business benefit being delivered, because of the ‘difficulties’ of introducing Relative Estimating, many teams revert to time estimation and tracking time.  Also, as we will see in one of the Case Studies below, an organisation’s choice of requirements management tool can make the use of Relative Estimating seem a waste of time for team members.

Another Potential Problem with Relative Estimating

So, having carried out ‘Planning Poker’, the development team now know the total number of ‘Story Points’ that the development represents; not much good to the business stakeholders who want to know how long it is going to take and how much it is going to cost.

On completion of the initial Product Backlog and before development begins, we need to ‘translate’ this total ‘Story Points’ into time.

An Agile Team’s progress is measured by the number of ‘Story Points’ that they deliver in one Sprint; known as the team’s ‘Velocity’.

So we need a knowledge of the team’s Velocity in order to establish an estimate of how long the development is likely to take; for example, if the total number of ‘Story Points’ is 200 and the team’s velocity for a 2-week Sprints is 10, then the estimated time to complete all the PBI is:

         200 ‘Story Points’ / 10 ‘Story Points per Sprint  x 2 (the number of weeks per Sprint) = 40 weeks

However, at the start of an Agile transition, we do not know what the team’s Velocity is or will be.  There are 2 methods to determine what the Velocity may be:

1. The team takes one of the ‘smallest’ PBI (with a Story Point of 1) and does a traditional break down to the tasks involved and estimate those tasks in time;  1 ‘Story Point’ is equivalent to the time represented by the sum of the times estimated for all the tasks
The team’s Velocity may be estimated by:
                                      ‘The number of working days in the Sprint / the estimated days for 1 Story Point’
For example, if the ‘time estimate’ for a PBI of 1 ‘Story Point’  is 1 day:
                                             10 working days in 2-week Sprint / 1 day = Velocity of 10
This velocity can then be used in the formula above to determine the estimate for the potential total time for the development.

2. The development team is allowed to start development for 2 or 3 Sprints taking PBI from the top of the Product Backlog.  At the end of the ‘experiment’ period, the total number of ‘Story Points’ for the completed PBI divided by the number of Sprints completed becomes the Velocity to use in the formula above to determine the estimate for the potential total time for the development.

The potential problem with this method is that management have to release funds for this experimental period without knowing the values to feed into the Business Case to determine whether the product development is viable before development begins.

Once teams have completed 1 product development, we recommend that the team members are kept together for other product developments even though the business area or technology may be different.  Having a team that works well together is more important than creating teams in an ad-hoc manner.  A team’s Velocity varies insignificantly over different product developments and so can be used directly in the formula above to determine the estimate for the potential total time for the development.\

Scoping the Product Backlog

Generally, Agile product developments have strict deadlines so that the major benefits can be accrued; benefits such as competitive advantage, meeting marketing needs, meeting customer expectations or complying with regulations.

Also, Agile teams comprise all the skills necessary to take the PBI from ‘names’ to a potentially shippable product; not all team members are full-time but the team is fixed.

Therefore, generally, the costs for a fixed time product development are also fixed.
Given the classic ‘Iron Triangle’ of development variables:
Scoping the Product Backlog


If we fix time and cost, then the only thing that can vary is the Requirements that are delivered in the fixed time for the fixed cost.

It is quite probable that the initial Product Backlog will contain more PBI than could reasonably be developed in the fixed time available; because the stakeholders/Product Owner has ordered the Backlog by business value, it is relatively straightforward to ‘draw a line’ underneath the lowest PBI in the list that will probably be developed.  We do not remove the lower value PBI because it has been often found during development that a high-value PBI is actually dependant on one of the lower value ones and the ordering has to be amended.

Stakeholders need to understand that even though some requirements (PBI) have been requested, it is probable that they will not be delivered.

But the Product Backlog scoping does not stop there.  The ‘story Points’ for the PBI are estimates and, by definition, they are not accurate.  In the past, to account for ‘inaccurate’ estimates, organisations have added contingency in time and costs to the estimates.

However, in Agile environments where the time and costs are effectively fixed, the development needs some ‘wriggle room’ for when estimates are proved significantly wrong and when requirements change during the development. For an effective Product Backlog, you need to follow Scrum Product Backlog tips.

The Minimum Viable Product (MVP)

The development team must agree with the Product Owner/Stakeholders which PBI represent the Minimum Viable Product, ie what is the minimum to be delivered in the fixed time in order to accrue the minimum benefit required.

There are ‘rules’ how big this MVP can be.  It has been found, from hard-won experience that for a ‘comfortable’ working environment:

1. When a team first starts an Agile transformation they should accept PBI in the MVP which represent around 50% to 55% of the estimated effort; ie if there are 200 ‘Story Points’ in the probable PBI, then the MVP should only contain the highest value PBI whose ‘Story Points add up to between 100 and 110.

2.When the team and the organisation are reasonably Agile-mature, between 9 months and a year of transformation, the team can accept PBI representing up to 65% of the total estimated effort in the MVP.

3.When the team and organisation are fully Agile-mature, PBI representing up to 70% by estimated effort may be accepted in the MVP.  It has been found that no matter how good the teams and organisation are, the variables that come along with all product development make promising more than 70% by estimated effort fraught with problems; the teams must strive not to give stakeholders over-expectations. 

The MoSCoW Rules

Some Agile Frameworks recommend using a technique called MoSCoW to ‘categorise’ the PBI.  The acronym stands for:

  • Must Haves: Those PBI that is essential to the product; equivalent to the MVP above.
  • Should Haves: Those PBI that is important but there is a workaround for them if they not completed in the fixed time
  • Could Haves: Those PBI that might be developed if all the Musts and Shoulds have been completed before the end of the fixed time
  • Won’t Haves:  Those PBI that was initially discovered but was not likely to be completed based on the estimates for the more valuable PBI

“The ‘o’s are just for fun”!

Using the MoSCoW rules allows the Business Case to be prepared with 3 scenarios:

  • The ‘Best Case’ scenario where all the probable PBI are completed; giving the best benefit in the fixed time
  • The ‘Expected Case’ scenario where all the Musts and Shoulds are completed giving the majority of the expected benefits in the fixed time
  • The ‘Worst Case’ scenario where only the Musts are delivered giving only the essential expected benefits in the fixed time.


Case Study 1:

I was working as a business analyst and ‘just-in-time’ Agile trainer/coach for an outsourced team building a replacement system.  The team had 6 full-time business representatives to specify the Agile Requirements (UML Use Cases in this instance).

Creation of the Product Backlog went smoothly; a good ‘To-Be’ Business Process Model was created and Use Cases to be included in the new system were identified; there were 92.

Unfortunately, I was due to go on 3 weeks holiday, so I briefed the team on how to order the Product Backlog and we ran through some Planning Poker with a few of the Use Cases.

When I came back from holiday, I discovered that the team business representatives had had problems in ordering the Product Backlog and had abandoned the attempt because they considered that all the PBI were essential.  Also, the whole team had had problems with Planning Poker because they didn’t know enough about the low-level details.

It had been decided to prototype all the Use Cases before estimation and the developers were split into 3 sub-teams for prototyping and the business representatives split into 3 pairs.

I had taught the team that the prototyping of any PBI should only go through 3 cycles:

1. Investigation where a very rough ‘first draft’ is specified, built and reviewed to make sure that the developers are ‘on the right lines’

2.Refinement where the majority of the functionality is specified, built and reviewed

3.Consolidation where any ‘tidying-up’ was specified, completed and the complete prototype demonstrated to the wider stakeholder community

If it takes more than the 3 cycles, then something is wrong with the detailed process being followed.

The time taken to produce a prototype should be no more than 2 days but it can be as short as 2 to 3 hours if done in a workshop.

Unfortunately, it was decided to pick Use Cases to prototype based on their perceived ‘easiness’ and ‘rotate’ the business representative pairs around the prototype builders such that one pair specified the Investigation, another pair reviewed the Investigation and specified the Refinement and the third pair reviewed the Refinement and specified the Consolidation.
 
At the ‘final’ review, with all 6 business representatives present, the ‘final’ prototypes were significantly different from what was originally specified for the Investigation and ‘recriminations’ took place.  So the prototype developers started again.

It had taken 3 weeks to develop the prototypes for 6 PBI!

I asked the project manager what his estimate was for completing the prototypes for all the PBI; he calculated that the time that would be necessary was 1 month longer than the specified length of the project.

Suffice to say that I worked with the customer representatives to convince them that it would be improbable to complete all the PBI in the fixed time/fixed cost development contract and helped them order the Product Backlog and decide on an MVP. It is worth noting this product development had a Vision, there were no stated objectives nor a visible Business Case.

I worked with the developers and business representatives (who were full team members) to ‘play’ Planning Poker.

Actual development work started one week later; PBI were completed in the fixed time that equated to approximately 70% of the expected business benefit; a further short project was commissioned to bring the expected business benefit up to 90%.

Lessons:

1. Do not go on holiday at a crucial time during the product development lifecycle!

2. If the Product Backlog is not ordered by business value, significant time will be wasted prototyping PBI of low business value

3. If prototyping is to be used, then the whole team should do it together in a workshop; all views will be accessible to all team members and a consensus reached in the minimal amount of time

4. If you are an Agile Project Manager/Scrum Master it is your responsibility to keep the team ‘on track’ and to question decisions that may cause a risk to the project

Case Study 2:

I had been asked to do some Agile coaching for some teams in a global organisation that was undertaking the Agile transformation of one of their divisions to use SAFe®/Scrum; the transformation had been running for 6 months.  There were 4 teams distributed around the globe doing support work to enable 24-hour coverage for this global organisation.

The reasons for SAFe®/Scrum for this transition I covered in my first article.

When I arrived Product Backlog requests were arriving daily to the team members from systems users and the individual team member decided whether the requests were important enough to interrupt the work that they were already doing; the Product Owners were not involved in the decision-making process at all.  As a consequence, there were many requests that had been started and abandoned in favour of ‘questionable’ higher priorities and I discovered that some requests had been sent to inappropriate team members, the work would have been better carried out by members of the other global teams.

Furthermore, although the teams were doing some Relative Estimating at Sprint Planning (not before), they were focusing on time estimates because that was what the requirements management tool required and what management was tracking progress by.  I shall cover the pitfalls of Sprint Planning in my next article.

I started resolving the Product Backlog issues by speaking to all the Product Owners, mostly via video-conferencing, to see if they understood the problems that the current Product Backlog processes were causing.  They did have some understanding but explained that that was the way they worked before the Agile transition and believed that changes to the process were out of their control.

I helped them devise a workable process whereby all requests would be sent to  the Product Owners  at a collective address.  They would take turns during a 24-hour period to determine, with Product Managers, the relative priority of new requests against those already on the Backlog.  In addition, once a week, they would ‘get together’ to decide which team would handle any unassigned requests; ‘show-stopper’ requests would be handled as a matter of urgency and handled by whichever team was immediately available and could resolve the issue before their end-of-day.

By this process, the Product Owners would gain control of the Product Backlog, there would be less questionable priority decisions and there would be fewer ‘disgruntled’ customers.

The process was approved by the Product Managers and all team members apprised of the reasons for the new process and their responsibilities within it.

It quickly became obvious at daily Scrums that not all team members were passing all requests that came to them directly from customers to the Product Owners; the process was reiterated to these team members but then the productivity of some of these members decreased significantly.  The cause was that they were still working on their ‘favourite’ customers requests but not reporting it to the rest of the team.

The Product Owners then had to analyse the central Change Request system for items that had been completed by their teams but had not appeared on the Product Backlog; the Change Request system was not integrated with the Product Backlogs.

Eventually, the ‘lesson’ was learned by ‘miscreant’ team members.

Lessons

1. Without control of the Product Backlog by the relevant authority (Product Owners), it is impossible to police work to give the best business value to the organisation

2. Without control of the Product Backlog, the resolution to some requests may be started and then abandoned in favour of other later requests leaving the customer frustrated

3.Estimating by time at the task level wastes a great deal of time; more of which in my next article.


Conclusion
The Product Backlog is arguably the most important artifact for product development:

  • The PBI must be ordered by business value
  • The PBI must be estimated, preferably by using Planning Poker
  • Its content over time must be controlled by the Product Owner or equivalent
  • Team members must be closely coached and mentored during the early instigation of process change to ensure their understanding of the need for the change and their compliance

Steve

Steve Ash

Blog Author

Steve Ash has been working with ‘Agile’ since 1993 when it was known as ‘Managed RAD’.  He was an early adopter of the DSDM Framework in 1995 becoming a DSDM Board Member in 2002 and was a DSDM examiner.  He is a DSDM Advanced Practitioner and Accredited Trainer/Coach. Steve has since embraced Scrum, Kanban, the techniques advocated by XP, Lean Software Development and Lean Startup. He joined the Agile Alliance in 2002 and is a Certified Scrum Master (CSM), Certified Scrum Product Owner (CSPO), SAFe® Certified Consultant (SPC4) and certified by APMG International to teach Agile Project Management and Agile Business Analysis courses. Since 1996, Steve has trained, mentored and coached hundreds of people in many public and commercial organisations in 11 countries from the USA, through Europe and India to Asia/PAC.
 

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Suggested Blogs

Why Scrum Is Lightweight; Simple To Understand; Difficult To Master?

85 percent of respondents say Scrum continues to improve quality of work life—State of Scrum 2017-2018 We have all heard companies who have adopted Scrum wax eloquent about its advantages and the benefits it brings in to business. Scrum has been adopted because it is supposed to be simple and promotes collaboration and communication. Yet, more organizations attempting the Agile/Scrum transformation often fail and end up abandoning their transformation or get stuck in a limbo. So, is the golden statement that ‘Scrum is lightweight, simple to understand, difficult to master’ true? In this blog we attempt to decipher this statement and understand how Scrum Masters can help make Scrum projects or implementations successful.Where to start?So, what makes Scrum so popular? That it is better suited to the changing market conditions of the present times is well known, but how is it able to do it?  Scrum is an adaptable, iterative framework that helps Scrum teams break down large projects into small chunks called epics and sprints. Goals are defined and timeboxed. Teams are small, self-organized and with a high degree of cross-function. A goal or functionality has to be delivered at the end of each sprint. This helps for quick feedback and gives teams the ability to adapt to changing requirements—a must in times when products have to adapt quickly to please changing user preferences.  The advantages of Scrum include:  More satisfied customers Better managed processes and happier teams Better visibility into projects Better quality products  Projects completed withing time and budget constraints Better adaptability  Motivated teams Lightweight Management ProcessScrum is a lightweight framework because it provides adaptable solutions to complex problems and helps teams and organizations generate value.Why Scrum is considered to be lightweight, easy to understand but difficult to master?Lightweight: Scrum, based on Agile values, has few elements and maximizes responsiveness to customer needs. This makes it lightweight and apt for software development in the modern world.  Easy to Understand: With just three roles, three artifacts, four ceremonies and 12 Agile values, Scrum is pretty easy to understand. Scrum is a collection of practices and concepts that teams use to build processes around. The Scrum Guide which is the Scrum bible is also easy to read and understand. The three scrum roles are: Team, Scrum Master, Product Owner The ceremonies are:  Sprint Planning, Daily Scrum, Retrospective and Sprint Review The three artifacts are: Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog, Burndown chart  Difficult to Master: So, if Scrum is so easy to learn about and understand then why is that it’s difficult to actually implement and master? Let us look at this from the perspective of a Scrum Master. A Scrum Master is a critical part of the Scrum team and is in effect a microcosm of Scrum upholding the Agile values and focusing on creating a self-organizing, highly motivated and collaborative team. Scrum is a not a one-size-fits- all framework. Perhaps that is what makes it difficult to master. It has to be tailored to suit the needs of each project, team and organization. There are several factors that need to be considered before adopting Scrum. The Scrum Master’s role, similarly, needs to be learnt and there are several skills a professional must have or needs to cultivate in order to be a successful Scrum Master. The Scrum Master’s Role in a Successful Scrum Adoption:There are many Scrum teams that have started out in the right way, but soon fall by the wayside as they do not follow Scrum in principle. This is where the Scrum Master plays a very critical role in the success of the team. Despite Scrum being ‘simple to understand and difficult to master’ the Scrum Master is considered to be the expert on all things Scrum.As a coach, guide and mentor, the Scrum Master should facilitate the successful adoption of Scrum, and help others to gain mastery over Scrum principles and values.A Scrum Master must mandatorily follow certain core values and inspire the team to follow them as well. These core values that include openness, commitment, focus, courage and respect bring the team together and promote better work ethics and practices.Besides inculcating Scrum principles and values and guiding a successful adoption, a Scrum Master should also have these attributes:  An Unbiased and Open Mind:  An unbiased and open mind is key to being a good Scrum Master. As part of their portfolio, Scrum Masters have to work with different teams and team members having different personalities. Having an open mind will help the Scrum Master to not look at every team with the same lens and treat each team differently. Solutions that work for one team may not work for other teams or situations. Having an open mind will help you realise this and tweak your decisions based on teams and situations.   Transparency:  Transparency and open communication are the pillars of Scrum. As a Scrum Master your intentions should be open and transparent to everyone including your team and the product owner. The team must at all times know your reasons for doing certain things or taking certain decisions. Being upfront with the team members will help in trust building and lead to better work ethics.   Metrics to Map Progress:There are several tools available to track a team’s progress and the Scrum Master must ensure that these metrics showing the team’s progress be made available to the entire team. This will help the team better plan sprints, work collaboratively and improve working practices in order to ensure better output and value.   Motivation for Team Members: Keeping your team members happy and motivated is a Scrum Master’s main job. This includes removing obstacles that may impede the team from performing and helping them work according to Scrum values and techniques. The development team develops the product, and a happy team means a well-built product and satisfied customers. Assistance to the Product Owner:  As a Scrum Master, aiding the Product Owner is a major part of your responsibility. The Product Owner is a major stakeholder in the Scrum team and the Scrum Master aids the product owner in backlog management and by facilitating Scrum events, product planning and by helping the team to identify backlog items. Aiding the Product Owner in issues that they may face with regards to the project, stakeholders or the team will create a positive environment and will make things between the team and the product owner smoother.   Focus on the Challenges: Every Scrum project comes with its set of issues. But an effective Scrum Master will be aware of every challenge or impediment that comes in the way of the development team and takes these problems head on. Focusing on these challenges early on and resolving them is paramount to the success and progress of the team and the project. Appreciation for Achievements:  The focus of daily sprints and retrospectives is often to celebrate achievements and give the development team proper appreciation. A Scrum Master encourages and motivates and this they also do by respective current achievements. While giving advise on how things should be done is necessary, appreciating the team on its achievements is equally important.   Respect for Others: Your team members all have different personalities and each brings their own uniqueness and expertise to the team. No one team member is less or more important than the other. An effective and efficient Scrum Master will recognise this early on and treat every team member with the same amount of respect.  Understanding of Situations in the Right Context:  Not all things are as what they appear. The sooner a scrum master understands this, the better. Situations in context to teams, individuals and even the organization are not always black and white and the Scrum Master must consider the baggage of organizational culture, current systems, internal politics, etc before coming to a conclusion about a team or a team members. Instead, one must attempt to form close relationships with the team and understand the workings of the team and the organizations before passing judgement. Ability to Have Tough Conversations :  You as a Scrum Master are often seen as a problem solver, friend and mentor. But don’t let this image of yours come in the way of making tough decisions or having tough conversations. As a Scrum Master you must have the courage to do the right thing and if this means having difficult but necessary conversations with either the team members, the product owner or the stakeholders, then you must do it.    Courage to Protect the Team:  More often than not, there are unreasonable demands made on the development team. The Scrum Master should have the courage to protect the team and say an emphatic ‘no’ to the Product Owner or the stakeholders.  Accountability: You are accountable for your team’s success as you are for its failures. If as a Scrum Master you want your team to be accountable then the best way to get them to do that is to be accountable yourself. You can do this by being more invested in the day-to-day activities of the team and considering yourself to be a part of the team as well.  Support for Team Members: As a Scrum Master you are not just invested in the project but also in the growth of individual team members. You should motivate, encourage and support your team members to grow and reach heights in their careers.   Deep Commitment: If the team feels that the Scrum Master is committed to the project, committed to the team and committed to the team members, then they are more likely to be open and transparent with the Scrum Master. This trust with the team has to be built so that team members can be open about the challenges they face. The Scrum Master is the voice of the team and must support them at all stages.   Focus on Improvement:  Scrum is all about continuous improvement and the success of the Scrum Master is also tied to the continuous improvement of the Scrum team. If your team is getting better with time then you are doing well as a Scrum Master. From daily sprints to retrospectives, the Scrum Master provides avenues for the team to improve itself, identify problems and suggest solutions to work better.  Conclusion Scrum is the most used Agile framework, yet there are several lessons that organizations need to learn about Scrum before they embark on a transformation journey. This lightweight and easy to use framework can turn around the fortunes of companies if implemented in the right way. It’s important for an organization’s culture to be ready to accept and implement Scrum for project and organizational success.  
7721
Why Scrum Is Lightweight; Simple To Understand; Di...

85 percent of respondents say Scrum continues to... Read More

Scrum Master – The Scrum Team’s Servant-Leader!

The term servant leader is synonymous with a Scrum Master. But what does it mean? The Scrum Master is a servant leader in Agile projects, but servant leadership goes far beyond Agile, and Scrum Masters serve more than just the team.In this blog we attempt to look at the Scrum Master’s role as a servant leader, what the role entails and the responsibilities of the Scrum Master beyond the team, in context to the organization. What is servant-leadership?The term servant leadership was first coined by Robert Greenleaf in his article “The Servant as Leader”, in which he defined a servant leader as: The Servant-Leader is servant first. It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. That leader significantly differs from one who is leader first, may be due to the need to acquire power, material belonging, control and authority within the organization. Servant leadership is something very different from traditional leadership, which places the leader at the top of the hierarchy and the employees in the lower rung. Servant leadership, in a sense, is the opposite of traditional leadership, as it places the leader at the bottom of the hierarchy while employees are on the higher rungs. The leaders, in this case, are serving the people above them. Servant leadership refers to leaders who believe in serving people and the community that they are a part of, rather than accumulating power for themselves. This style of leadership emphasizes on helping subordinates better themselves, empowering employees and helping others perform to the best of their abilities.Servant leadership does not prescribe telling employees what to do, instead it helps the workforce find their sense of ownership and unlock their potential to reach their goals. Servant leadership is all about empowering others, which when consistently done can raise morale, enhance productivity and reduce employee attrition.Servant Leadership and ScrumScrum, in a way, is the very essence of servant leadership. Unlike traditional project management methodologies, it does not follow a top-down, hierarchical approach. Instead, decisions are lateral and happen with the involvement of the whole team. Scrum is the perfect approach in which to practice the concept of servant leadership. The 5 Scrum values of Openness, Respect, Commitment, Courage, and Focus, adhere to the philosophy of Servant Leadership. The Scrum Master plays a key role in the development of the product, the team and the organization. The Scrum Guide defines the servant leadership a Scrum Master’s role has to perform in context to the roles mentioned above. The Scrum Values that a Scrum Master practices have a ripple effect throughout the organization. The Scrum Master is seen as an evangelist for practicing and promoting Scrum in the enterprise.The Agile Manifesto and servant-leadershipThe Agile Manifesto states that one must value: Individuals and interactions over Process and tools Working software over Comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over Contract negotiation Responding to change over Following a plan These again align with the values of servant leadership, which is all about putting people or employees first. The Agile Manifesto describes focusing on building projects around motivated individuals and giving them an environment of support, trust and collaboration—all characteristics of servant leadership.Who Are These Servant Leaders?The Scrum Guide defines the service provided by the Scrum Master as servant leadership. The Scrum Master selflessly provides servant leadership to the development team, product owner and the whole organization. By serving these entities, the Scrum Master can create a high performing team, a valuable product and an efficient organization that is able to meet business objectives and keep customers happy.  Though the term Scrum Master may be deceptive, the Scrum Master is not a master of the team but in fact serves the team in order to ensure smooth functioning and productivity.Servant Leadership and Scrum Master Roles of Servant LeadershipServant leadership:The day-to-day activity of a Scrum Master involves servant leadership. Servant leadership in a scrum team involves performance planning, coaching, helping the team self- organize, resolving conflicts through conflict management, removing obstacles that hinder progress and serving the team. The Scrum Master, while practicing servant leadership, helps the team grow and mature and become independent enough to make their own decisions. Servant leadership in Scrum is all about making the team self-reliant, so they can cope with the pressures of the role. As a servant leader the Scrum Master creates a high performing team, helps them become collaborative and high performing in order to achieve goals and meet the requirements of the customer.  Service to the Scrum Team: As a servant leader, the primary responsibility of the Scrum Master is to help the development team perform. They help the team perform to the best of their abilities by giving them an environment that is conducive to work in, encouraging them, guiding them and removing obstacles that may hinder progress. As a coach, the Scrum Master will guide the team on scrum processes and help them adhere to Agile values during the development of the product. The Scrum Master is responsible for the scrum team’s effectiveness, and they work tirelessly to ensure that the team is motivated, encouraged, creative and innovative. The Scrum Master through servant leadership helps the team improve Scrum practices which helps them become more productive and generate value. The Scrum Team’s role in motivating and helping the team comes through in the daily stand-up meetings that are arranged as part of the sprint. The Scrum Master encourages team members to share their grievances and progress made through the sprint. Team members can talk about obstacles that may be hindering their work and due cognizance will be taken up by the Scrum master to ensure that these obstacles are removed.  According to the Scrum Guide, the Scrum Master helps the Development Team by: Coaching the team in becoming self-organized and cross-functional Helping the Scrum Team focus on creating high-value increments by removing impediments Helping the team deliver within the timeframe of the sprint Service to the Product Owner: The Scrum Master is a servant leader not just for the development team but also the Product Owner. While the Product Owner is primarily responsible for the product backlog, they cannot do this alone. The Scrum Master aids the development team and the Product Owner with effective product backlog management.The Scrum Master is involved at every stage of the product backlog grooming, helping the product owner with Scrum events, product planning and to identify backlog items along with the development team. The Scrum Master helps the Product Owner define the product vision to the team.   According to the Scrum Guide, the Scrum Master helps the Product Owner by: Helping in Product Goal definition and Product Backlog management Helping the Scrum Team understand manage the Product Backlog items Setting up empirical product planning in complex environments and, Managing and facilitating stakeholder collaboration.Service to the Organization: The Scrum Master is a coach and motivator not just for the development team but goes beyond the team to spread the awareness of Scrum in the entire organization. Scrum Masters coach and help teams and departments understand Scrum and develop an Agile mind-set. Besides servant leadership to the team a Scrum Master is also involved in promoting the ideas and values of Scrum. An organization can get an agile mind-set only if the entire organization adopts Scrum and not just a few teams. This is where the Scrum Master comes in, helping other teams not involved with Scum to gain the Agile mind-set, through training and coaching. The Scrum Master is an Agile evangelist and promotes Scrum enterprise-wide.According to Scrum.org the Scrum Master serves the organization by: Leading, training, and coaching the organization in adopting Scrum Planning and advising Scrum implementations within the organization Coaching employees and stakeholders in the way Scrum works Helping stakeholders work with Scrum TeamsSome Servant-Leader Behaviours for every Scrum MasterBeing empathetic: This is the foremost personality trait required for anyone wanting to become a Scrum Master. Your empathy will shine through in your interactions with the team members and your dealings with the stakeholders. You should be able to see problems from the point of view of each party and work towards solving these problems. Caring: As a caring and empathetic Scrum Master, your team will feel free to approach you and share their concerns. Providing a listening ear will make you more approachable. You will be able to more clearly understand the impediments that are stopping project progress and work towards providing a solution.  Managing Conflicts: Not all team members will get along with each other and this can cause disruptions and problems within the team, lowering their productivity. As a Scrum Master you need to be great at conflict management, help others solve their problems, work with each other and create a high performing and harmonious team. Building relationships: You need to build a rapport with your team, the product owner and the stakeholders. This will help you communicate freely and help others approach you with their problems and issues. You need to build that relationship of trust and take everyone along on the journey of success.  Being ethical: Ethics play an important role in software development, especially since software now controls every aspect of our lives. The product created should be free of malice and fraud. The Scrum Master should guide the team in delivering the product at a value and standard that is expected and agreed upon with the stakeholder. There should not be any shortcuts or concessions made on the quality of the product delivered as this will affect not just the Scrum Master and the team’s reputation but will cause a dent in the reputation of the organization.   Conclusion  Servant leadership and the Scrum Master’s role is the backbone of Scrum. The Scrum Master as a servant leader re-emphasizes the values of Scrum and helps to enhance teamwork, collaboration, motivation and value. Under the able servant leadership of the Scrum Master, individual members and the team will grow, become more confident and help in delivering value.  
7887
Scrum Master – The Scrum Team’s Servan...

The term servant leader is synonymous with a Scrum... Read More

A Guide to Scaling Scrum

Scrum has been proven to work well for small teams. But the true benefits of Agile can only be reaped if Agile and Scrum are scaled at the enterprise level. However, this is easier said than done. According to statistics, 47% of Agile transformations are not successful. While this is a worrying trend, there are still hundreds of organizations who have got it right and are able to survive the competition by innovating faster, delivering value and adapting to changing markets. How are they doing it? By using scaled Scrum.There are several tools and frameworks available for scaling Scrum at the enterprise level. In this blog, we attempt to look at a few of these.  Scaling Scrum with NexusNexus is among the most popular frameworks for scaling Scrum. According to the Nexus Guide, “Nexus is a framework for developing and sustaining scaled product delivery initiatives. It builds upon Scrum, extending it only where absolutely necessary to minimize and manage dependencies between multiple Scrum Teams while promoting empiricism and the Scrum Values.” How is Nexus different from Scrum? Scrum defines three primary roles: The Product Owner, the Scrum Master and the development team. These three roles work together in one team.The Nexus framework consists of several Scrum teams that work together toward a common product goal and defines the Nexus Integration Team as an additional accountability.  Nexus helps to build on the values of Scrum and also solves the collaboration and dependency challenges that tend to occur between teams in Scrum.Benefits of using Nexus Nexus extends Scrum in the following ways:  Accountabilities: Nexus introduces the Nexus Integration Team, which consists of the Scrum Master, Product Owner, and members. This team is accountable for delivering a workable product at the end of each sprint.  Events: Nexus events aim to add to or supplement Scrum events and serve not just individual teams but also the Nexus Integration Team. The objective of a sprint is to achieve the Nexus sprint goal. Artifacts: Although the teams are different, within the Nexus framework they all work towards a single goal and follow a single product backlog. There’s a high amount of transparency and work is allocated to each team. The Nexus Integration TeamAccording to the Nexus Guide, “the Nexus Integration Team exists to coordinate, coach, and supervise the application of Nexus and the operation of Scrum so the best outcomes are derived.” The Nexus Integration Team or NIT comprises of the Scrum Master, the Product Owner and Nexus integration team members. There are generally three to nine Scrum teams working together in Nexus. All of them follow a single product backlog and work towards delivering a single product. The Nexus Integration Team forms an essential role within Nexus and is tasked with providing transparent accountability among the teams in Nexus.Product OwnerThe Product Owner is accountable for maximizing the product value and the work carried out in Nexus. Their primary task is to order and refine the product backlog. Being a member of the Nexus Integration Team, the product owner will work with all the Scrum teams in the Nexus Integration team. The product owner and the teams work towards better defining and refining the product backlog.Scrum MasterJust like in regular Scrum, the Scrum Master in the Nexus Integration Team is also responsible for ensuring that the Nexus framework is understood by everyone on the team as prescribed by the Nexus Guide.   MembersThe members of the Nexus Integration Team are the Scrum team members who aid the Scrum teams in adoption of tools and practices that will help the team and members deliver value at the end of each sprint that meets the definition of done. Nexus Integration Team membership should be considered more important than the individual Scrum Team membership and members should work towards first fulfilling their Nexus team responsibilities.What are the Events in Nexus?Nexus adds or augments the events as defined by Scrum. The Nexus event durations are like Scrum event durations and are guided by the Scrum Guide.  Nexus events consist of: Sprint- A Nexus sprint is the same as in Scrum, at the end of which a single increment is delivered.  Cross team refinement- The aim of Nexus is to enhance collaboration and reduce cross team dependencies. Cross team refinement helps to make dependencies and responsibilities more transparent. This makes it easier for Scrum teams within the Nexus to clearly identify and deliver their allocated tasks.  Nexus Sprint Planning- Nexus sprint planning will involve the participation of the Product Owner and concerned teams' members from each team. The purpose of the Nexus Sprint Planning is to assign and co-ordinate activities for a single sprint.  Nexus Daily Scrum- This is like the daily stand up in Scrum. Nexus daily scrum is used to identify any issues and track progress. Any issues are immediately prioritized and solved so that they do not hinder the work of the developers.  Nexus Sprint Review- This event is held at the end of sprints to provide feedback on the increment that has been built and on any future updates that have to be made. Nexus Sprint Retrospective- Like in Scrum, Nexus retrospectives are an important part of the project and are used to reflect on how quality and consistency can be improved.  Some Nexus ArtifactsNexus artifacts are the same as Scrum artifacts and when implemented correctly ensure transparency and value maximization. Every artifact is designed to give a commitment. For example, the product backlog is the artifact and its commitment is the product goal. Other artifacts and their commitments include: Nexus Sprint Backlog-Nexus Sprint Goal Integrated Increment-Definition of Done Along with Nexus, LeSS is another popular framework for scaling agile.  Scaling Scrum with LeSS The Large-Scale Scrum (LeSS) framework is an offering from Atlassian and is a framework for scaling Scrum to multiple teams that are working on the same product. The idea behind LeSS is to start with a single Scrum team as defined in the Scrum Guide and then replicate it to multiple teams who are working on a single product. LeSS has earned the label of being “barely sufficient” as it is a simple framework to apply and uses the basic concepts of Scrum to scale.  How do Sprint Planning meetings in LeSS work?  LeSS generally carries out sprint planning in two stages. Sprint Planning One focuses on selecting items that are of topmost priority, solving unanswered issues and defining the sprint goal. The Sprint Planning Two is like the sprint plan of regular Scrum and focuses on creating a plan of action for getting things done.  Daily meeting  The daily Scrum meeting in LeSS is similar to how it is done in normal single Scrum teams and involves team members discussing the work accomplished and the work to be done during the day. It is a time-boxed meeting and helps teams address any issues that may be hindering work.   Sprint Delivery Meeting (Review) The sprint review meeting is an essential part of LeSS and helps teams and stakeholders review the product built during the sprint and suggest changes and new ideas.   Retrospective The retrospective for LeSS is similar to one team Scrum. These retrospectives held at the end of the sprint will help teams to reflect on the progress of tasks, and identify the obstacles that may hinder or impede the overall project.  Let’s take a look at some of the other frameworks that are used for scaling agile. Scaling Scrum with SAFe®The Scaled Agile Framework, SAFe in short, follows the principles of lean and agile and helps in scaling Scrum to the enterprise. It helps to manage alignment, collaboration, and delivery from multiple agile teams to ensure enterprise success. It systematically focuses on applying Scrum at each level of the enterprise, to maximize value and ensure a successful agile transformation.A successful SAFe adoption ensures end-to-end business agility with significant improvements in strategy, delivery, execution and business competencies. It helps organizations overcome competition and ensure innovative business solutions to gain customer trust and partnership. The SAFe framework is continuously improvised in order to help organizations cope with the digital age and ensure that business outcomes are delivered.Scaling Scrum with the Scrum@Scale frameworkAnother framework that allows organizations to implement Scrum at scale is the Scrum@Scale framework. This framework expands on the core principles of Scrum and helps to scale Scrum over a wide range of industries and sectors, ensuring customer satisfaction and creation of successful products. It promotes communication across all teams and departments, and optimizes resources, removes roadblocks and ensures creation of innovative products.A Final Word By driving Agile at the organizational level, companies can gain all the benefits of team-level Scrum at scale. More often than not the principles of team level Scrum are not sustainable at the enterprise level and the transformation fails. Tested and proven Agile scaling frameworks are now able to turn this around, and help organizations scale up the principles and practices of Scrum to become more adaptable, flexible and responsive. Professionals can master these frameworks and help their organization adopt the culture, mind-set and principles of Scrum and agile.  
5496
A Guide to Scaling Scrum

Scrum has been proven to work well for small tea... Read More

Useful links