PSM I questions
I am preparing for PSM I and I got some questions to myself :
1) Sprint review meeting;
who is responsible to ask questions about increment? I believe it is the whole scrum team as they are accountable to create a useful and valua increment so if any stakeholders have some questions, anyone from the team can aswer
can this meeting be used to discuss with stk the change of the market and what we should do next for the Product to increase its value as well as review the timeline, budget, potential capabilities for the next releases of functionalities?
I believe so, as stk can ask some questions about the product and the final Sprint review a revised Product backlog items and a refined product goal
2) Daily scrum: can other people outside the developers participate? I mean in case a manager wants to check how the daily scrum is set, could they attend?they just observe the, if it is yes, do we need the scrum master attend to to monitor daily scrum still follows the scrum rules? I would say NO at all, as the daily scrum is for dev only.
3) product backlog refinement: who is accountable to do it? I believe they are PO for ordering and description details and Developers for sizing. could it be the PO ask the stakeholders to take part in refinement session (set up by Scrum team as their own internal rule)?can they be involved but PO and Dev remain accountable at all?
4) from scrum glossary; scrum guide: the definition consists of scrum's roles, events , artifacts and rules to bind them together. are the values and the pillars included in event and artifacts in this sentence? I would enlist both of them separately.
Firstly, Scrum has no meetings. It has four events!
From the scrum guide about the sprint review:
The purpose of the Sprint Review is to inspect the outcome of the Sprint and determine future adaptations. The Scrum Team presents the results of their work to key stakeholders and progress toward the Product Goal is discussed.
During the event, the Scrum Team and stakeholders review what was accomplished in the Sprint and what has changed in their environment. Based on this information, attendees collaborate on what to do next. The Product Backlog may also be adjusted to meet new opportunities. The Sprint Review is a working session and the Scrum Team should avoid limiting it to a presentation.
Although the Daily Scrum is for the Developers, the SM can attend in order to see if the Developers are applying the Scrum rules, and if not, they can bring this up during the Sprint Retrospective. If the SM is also working on the increment, then they will participate instead of attending. The PO can also attend to make themselves available to answer questions (this is usually done throughout the day), as long as they realise that they cannot openly participate. Non-Scrum Team personnel could also possibly attend but in a listening only mode.
The PO is accountable for effective Product Backlog management. Refinement is done by the PO & Developers in an ongoing basis. During the Sprint Review stakeholders can help too.
From the scrum guide about the pillars:
Scrum combines four formal events for inspection and adaptation within a containing event, the Sprint. These events work because they implement the empirical Scrum pillars of transparency, inspection, and adaptation.
From the scrum guide about the values.
Successful use of Scrum depends on people becoming more proficient in living five values:
Commitment, Focus, Openness, Respect, and Courage
When these values are embodied by the Scrum Team and the people they work with, the empirical Scrum pillars of transparency, inspection, and adaptation come to life building trust.
thanks Scott, my bad, meetings are events indeed!
However, I count 5 formal events, not 4 because I consider Sprint too, it is a container, but always an event, am I wrong?
regarding the daily scrum, shall SM atted ONLY if requested? I mean they usually don't attend it, they do only if Developers need them for some advices.
regarding the daily scrum, shall SM atted ONLY if requested?
That would be rather prescriptive. Suppose the Scrum Master saw a need to attend, as might be the case with a novice team who don't yet know how to conduct a Daily Scrum, for example?
ok, so in that case they would be facilitator and coach of the daily scrum and it looks like their initiative
Hi Flavia, In the context of the Daily Scrum, what might coaching look like?
I'd say in different aspects such as:
- keep the time of Daily scrum in 15 mins
- help Developers to focus on what steps they truly doing to get the increment
- help to be focused on sprint goal
but I think Scrum master is an observer during the daily scrum and then, they can share their observations after the daily scrum in another meeting or directly in the retrospective, do you agree?
What about the Scrum Master as a facilitator? Out of what you described Flavia, what could be considered as elements of facilitation (vs. coaching)?
I am personally working on being more mindful about what is coaching and what is not. I like this Lyssa Adkins quote "Coaching is not about giving advice, but about supporting people to come up with their own solutions. If you ask the right questions, they always will.”
I think it is good to know when we are facilitating, when we are coaching, when we are teaching etc.
If we are explaining something we are likely teaching.
If we are asking questions to enable others to uncover the answers, we are likely coaching.
Sharing observations can be like holding up a mirror which could fall under coaching.