Forums

Hello there,

I have a question regarding the definition of the Increment in the Scrum Guide. It is defined liked this:

The Increment is the sum of all the Product Backlog items completed during a Sprint and all previous Sprints.

The definition consists of two parts:

The Increment is
a) the sum of all the Product Backlog items completed during a Sprint and

b) all previous Sprints.

From my point of view only a) defines what an Increment is. An Increment is for me an additive to something, not the overall set. My opinion is that a) + b) defines what a product is and not an Increment.

In the section Definition of “Done” it also says:

Each Increment is additive to all prior Increments and thoroughly tested, ensuring that all Increments work together.

Does this not contradict to the definition of the Increment [a)+b)] above?

What is your take on this? I would be very happy to get your feedback on this topic.

Thanks.

It also seems to me that the word "Increment" is used with two different meanings, but I think the wanted definition of increment is [a+b] because under the aspect of continous integration you should not develop an increment [only a] and wait for an integration phase, you should make an inkrement [a&b] that works.

but may someone with more experience can tell us the right meaning of those might controvers definitions.

br,

Hey Philipp,

thanks for your reply.

For me b) does not define that the Increment is "Done" and therefore is in a usable condition (= potentially releaseable).

In the section "Increment" it says: ...the new increment must be "Done"...
a) without b) maps to the sentence above from my point of view.

I still think that a) +b) is the definition for the product. But I am not a native English speaker and therefore maybe I have misunderstood the sentence.

Hogir, Philipp,

think about the basic question: What is your product? After all, that's what we are trying to build, sell and pay our wages with. So is your product a single feature (like the "log in" button on this webpage)? Or is it rather the whole thing (in this case, the whole webpage)? If it is the whole thing: Would you want new features (which you might have paid for) to properly work as well when you visit the webpage or would it be sufficient for you if the old stuff works?

Dear Dominik,

thanks for your input, but unfortunately it did not make things clearer for me. To answer your question: Yes, I want the product always working well. Therefore I want the increment to be "Done" at the end of the sprint so that it can be released.

But I have still the open question about the definition of an Increment within the Scrum Guide.

I have also attached an image to make it clearer what I think the an Increment is:
It would be great if you guys could help me out with the confusion I currently have.

P.S.
I have also looked into different dictionaries for an definition e.g. this definition :

something gained or added

which does not fit to the definition of an increment in the Scrum Guide.
(Src: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/increment)

An increment isn't the same thing as the product unless it is released. An increment only needs to be *potentially* releasable.

An increment is all prior releases plus the current release. It isn't just the delta increase from a previous release because:

a) The content of prior releases is needed in order for the work done this sprint to have value and to be potentially releasable, and
b) An increment of potentially usable functionality must be tested adequately. This includes regression testing.

Saying that "Each Increment is additive to all prior Increments" isn't a contradiction; the guide is saying that you have to include all prior increments in the current one, which is correct.

Hi Ian,

thanks for your post, it makes the definition for me clear. I understand now better where the definitions is coming from.

The increment in scrum is like the definition, I mean (a+b). I see no problem with the definition of done.

nothing+a = inc 1
a+b = inc1+b = inc2
a+b+c = inc2+c = inc3

All prior increments may be interpreted as the previous increment because they are additive.

My two cents