Scrum Manager and Scrum Owner
I have a question about Scrum manager and Scrum Owner. Who they are? What are responsibilities of them in a scrum team?
Does the Scrum Guide classify any of these roles as Scrum's roles ?
There are no such roles like scrum manager and scrum owner prescribed in SCRUM.
Three roles defined are:
1. The Product owner
2. A Scrum master
3. Development team
Sometimes the roles' names themselves will be adjusted a bit to fit an organization's culture, structure or in some cases enhance the Scrum adoption process. When in doubt, I always check the Scrum Guide for clarification. Knowing the differences between it and how your organization uses Agile/Scrum will vary sometimes, which is fine, but might not be the same case at your next job. It could also be a chance to become a coach and have a positive impact on your team's successes and/or your career.
Sometimes the roles' names themselves will be adjusted a bit to fit an organization's culture, structure or in some cases enhance the Scrum adoption process.
I would be very wary of an organization that does this. I'm not saying that it's inherently wrong to use different terminology, but I don't see how it helps, and I feel it hinders Transparency.
If an organization wants to implement Scrum, but is more comfortable with alternative names for the roles, what is the reason for that? Do people expect the roles to be seen and fulfilled differently to the Scrum Guide definitions? Are their influential people within the organization who are resisting Scrum?
Maybe people came up with something that works better than Scrum for that organization, but getting the names right should be one of the easiest things to do, so I'd suspect a culture that is resisting to change.
The name of the roles in Scrum should never be changed. Each role in Scrum has it's place and is named accordingly. Changing the name of a role to something else because it might fit better into the organization already implicates, why doing so is wrong. It's not Scrum that has to change to fit the organisation. It's the organisation that has to change to fit Scrum. Therefore, changing the name of a role in Scrum is impedimental when it comes to adaption of Scrum by an organisation.
I totally agree with all the comments in this post. The roles that you mentioned do not exist in Scrum and adding such roles just adds confusion. This issue should actually be caught by your Scrum Master and she/he is responsible to make sure that the Scrum practices, theories and rules are being followed and understood.
actually this question relate with my exam question.
+1 to all the previous replies.
When roles or terminology do not change when adopting Scrum, the resulting effect is that little actually changes. Scrum must be more than a simple re-labeling effort.
Niroshan, where exactly did you get this exam question/answer from? None of the answers is correct.
Also, there are no such things as "main roles" in Scrum. Each of the defined roles serves a vital purpose, and you cannot have Scrum if those roles are not properly fulfilled.
The only valid Scrum roles among those listed are iv and v. Since none of the supplied answers are therefore valid, what does that tell you about the quality of the exam in which that question appears?
Thanks for all comments...
In response to my question, the answer was "d". This means that there are two "Scrum Owner" and "Scrum Manager" characters.
According to my argument, "Product Owner" may be called as "Scrum Owner". As the reason, the team was working until the product was finished under the "Product Owner". It's like a renting. Within that time the owner of the scrum team is "Product Owner".
And "Scrum Master" may be called as "Scrum Manager". The financial manager is managed the money. HR Manager is managed human resources. Therefore, the "Scrum Manager" should be managed the Scrum Team. He should have the good knowledge about Scrum Process Model. "Scrum Master" have good knowledge about Scrum Process Model. According to my argument, "Scrum Master" can be called as "Scrum Manager".
Sometimes my argument can be wrong. If has any error in my argument, Please note it.
I'm not going to say whether the roles of Scrum Owner and Scrum Manager are a good or bad thing, but they certainly aren't something that appear in the Scrum Guide and are not Scrum roles.
If anyone feels the need to include these roles in a "Scrum" implementation, I would ask them to question whether they understand how this differs from what appears in the Scrum Guide, and whether the roles bring anything positive that can't already be achieved in Scrum.
By revising Scrum roles, do you believe you would make an implementation of the framework more or less transparent to stakeholders?
Therefore, the "Scrum Manager" should be managed the Scrum Team.
No. The Scrum Master "manages" only the Scrum process. The Scrum Master serves the Development Team and Product Owner.
You should be curious why there is such resistance to proper Scrum within your organization. The reasons why may be illuminating.
Implementing official Scrum roles is anything but trivial.