Concept Clarification Questions (Scrum Master role related)

Last post 11:37 pm August 10, 2017
by LK L
11:37 pm August 10, 2017

Hi all,

I am quite new to Scrum. I have followed through this Forum, but have some concept clarification questions in mind (Scrum Master role related). Would appreciate some advices from the experts & practitioners in this group.

1. Scrum Guide states that "When the values of commitment, courage, focus, openness and respect are embodied and lived by the Scrum Team, the Scrum pillars of transparency, inspection, and adaptation come to life and build trust for everyone".

I'm NOT native in English, so I wonder: should I interpret "transparency" and "trust" as Scrum values (I do not mean "Scrum Values")?
(Remark - I'm a bit confused because it seems that Scrum Guide has no terms definition of "Scrum Values" while I think the 5 named values may lead to the outcome of other values.)
Also, if SM encourages DT to voice out their concerns/views, does this show value of "courage" or "opennesss" or both? I'm still not crystal clear (maybe, because not native English) even after reading the part of Scrum Values in Pocket Guide.

2. In typical projects, the vendors often have delays in delivering their components, should SM suggest PO to move those impacted PBIs into another new backlog for future sprints?
With reference to Ian's blog, my view tends to have PBIs re-ordering accordingly but I'm not sure about the guidelines on whether a new backlog is required. Any advice?

3. If someones among the DT keep arguing on technical design, apart from suggesting DT have open discussion to address this asap, should SM also organize team build event(s) or just observe/re-check later at restrospective?
With reference to Ken's blog, my view tends to let DT self-organize & then follow up at retro. Is my understanding correct?

4. In case of an impediment due to the shareing of a SME (unfortunately common cases), should SM allocate the SME to 1 team per each of multiple sprints so as to enable dedicated support for each of multiple DTs? Or alternatively, just consult with all DTs on their handling?
With reference to the threads like that below, my view is yes, because the SME will be more effective (with less waste) when not multi-tasking among teams and SM should remove impediments which can't be reasonably resolved by DTs. Is this correct?

5. Daily Scrums sometimes may have DT members missing. Should SM step in (but not necessarily attend Daily Scrums)?
My view is no, because SM should ensure that DT has the meeting, but DT is responsible for conducting the Daily Scrum. Am I correct?

Thanks a lot!!