Should Product Owners attend Retro meetings?
Here is a team called Development Operations, which also includes the Scrum Master. Unfortunately, these meetings often turn into sessions of praise and compliments exchanged mainly among developers and directed at the Scrum Master.
The Scrum Master moderates but is not subject to any feedback or evaluation during the retrospectives. Additionally, there are two team members who tend to be very subjective and often direct a barrage of criticism at the POs.
As a result, instead of being constructive or helpful — especially for the POs — the retrospectives become more emotional and, as mentioned, quite subjective. I personally leave these meetings with a negative feeling, and it’s demotivating.
I am not the only one who has experienced this. A colleague who previously worked as a PO with this team had similar feelings and even raised the issue in a session with our manager.
So I ask myself: as a PO, am I required to attend retrospectives?
The Scrum Master's invitations to these meetings list POs as required, which makes the situation even more uncomfortable.
Sorry you're going through all this pain. What you’re asking isn't a question of attendance, it’s a team dynamic and psychological safety issue. When feedback is consistently one directional, such as praise for some, criticism for others, Sprint Retrospectives lose professionalism, transparency and purpose. Are any positive adaptations made for the following Sprints?
As a Scrum Master I try to be open to feedback in the Sprint Retrospective. I'm hearing that the Scrum Master is missing a key opportunity for growth and possibly undermining the psychological safety Scrum Masters are supposed to foster, because of emotional and personal critiques.
If I was a person in this situation I might raise it to the Scrum Master (if I felt safe doing it), or see if there is a possibility to discuss the situation with an Agile coach or people manager. And if the group dynamics didn't get better I probably would excuse myself and be clear with the Scrum Master that the current environment isn't constructive and the dynamics need to improve to focus on improvements rather than personal judgement.
Wishing you all the best.
The Scrum Guide makes it clear that the Sprint Retrospective is for the Scrum Team to improve itself. The Product Owner is a member. So yes, you should attend.
Why not socialize the Scrum Guide during the Retrospective, so reference is made to the Scrum Framework and its effective implementation? The Definition of Done might be improved for example.
Yeah, the Product Owner (PO) is part of the Scrum Team and should be present at the Sprint Retrospective.
That said, the Retrospective is not a forum for blame or finger-pointing. The guide explicitly states that the team discusses “what went well during the Sprint, what problems it encountered, and how those problems were (or were not) solved.” The goal is to improve how the team works together — not to single out individuals.
If the sessions are feeling negative or demotivating, this is something the team (or you) should address directly in the next Retrospective. Consider setting some ground rules (or “working agreements”) around respectful communication and psychological safety.
Recurring dynamics as described undermine trust and collaboration. Bring it to the team’s attention in a constructive way — or, if needed, involve the Scrum Master to help facilitate a more productive discussion.
As others have mentioned, yes the Product Owner is a member of the Scrum Team and should participate in Sprint Retrospective.
An accountability of the Scrum Master is...
Ensuring that all Scrum events take place and are positive, productive, and kept within the timebox.
There is a role for the SM to play here in supporting a positive and productive event.
Along the lines of Ian's suggestion, it may be worth revisiting Scrum Values as a guideline. Having the Courage to be Open is important but it needs to be balanced with Respect when raising issues or opportunities.
Worth noting that the Scrum Master is also a member of the Scrum Team and they ought to participate in retrospection along with the team. They do not need to be the facilitator or moderator. The team can self-organize on running their Retro, or anyone on the team can facilitate (if needed).
I’ve had a similar experience and honestly, these retros feel more demotivating than helpful. As a PO, I question if attending is truly valuable when feedback isn’t balanced and the focus shifts away from improvement.
In our retros, the Scrum Master is also a team member while possibly serving as a moderator (if the team chooses them to be a moderator- currently one of our developers is our moderator). This means they are also subject to constructive feedback as are all team members. Sometimes the hard part of retro is if the team feels they are being forced to come up with something if they truly have nothing to offer. Some may want to skip every retro saying everything is fine. But periodic review is helpful. We address team dynamics, sprint victories (why did things go well), team challenges (what did not work that we can change), and other topics. The more challenging aspect is when leadership requests the team to discuss a topic in retro and then wants feedback on the team discussion. We will answer if we discussed a topic but won't divulge the conversation. If leadership would like conversation with the team on a topic, this should happen outside of retro.