Skip to main content

Myth: Having A Sprint Goal Is Optional In Scrum

September 25, 2019

Without Sprint Goals - an illustration by Thea Schukken

 

Scrum is intended as a simple, yet sufficient framework for complex product delivery. Scrum is not a one-size-fits-all solution, a silver bullet or a complete methodology. Instead, Scrum provides the minimal boundaries within which teams can self-organize to solve complex problems with an empirical approach. This simplicity is its greatest strength, but also the source of many misinterpretations and myths. In this series of posts we — your ‘Mythbusters’ Christiaan Verwijs & Barry Overeem — address common myths and misunderstandings. The great visuals are by Thea Schukken. You can find previous episodes here.

Does your Scrum Team use Sprint Goals? If not, why? Perhaps your team is finding it hard to identify a goal for the Sprint out of the patchwork of items on the Sprint Backlog? Or perhaps the Product Owner doesn’t know how, being unable to balance requests from many different groups of stakeholders?

In this post, we bust one of the most persistent myths in Scrum; the notion that Sprint Goals are optional in Scrum. A practice that is nice-to-have, but hardly ever practically possible. We will show that the reverse is true.

Busting The Myth

Let's begin by revisiting the Scrum Guide. It starts by explaining the Sprint Goal is crafted by the Scrum Team during Sprint Planning, usually based on an objective defined by the Product Owner. The guide goes on to clarify that a ‘Sprint Goal’ is an objective for the Sprint that will be met through implementing selected work from the Product Backlog. It “offers guidance to the Development Team on why it is building the Increment”. Instead of prescribing a format for Sprint Goals or how to craft them, the guide emphasizes that “The selected Product Backlog items deliver one coherent function, which can be the Sprint Goal. But the Sprint Goal can be any other coherence that causes the Development Team to work together rather than on separate initiatives”.

“The Sprint Goal can be any other coherence that causes the Development Team to work together rather than on separate initiatives” — Scrum Guide.

It's interesting to note that ‘Sprint Goal’ appears 27 times in the Scrum Guide. Of all the elements that make up the Scrum Framework, only Sprint (173), Increment (47) and Done (40) appear more often. Sprint Goals are also specifically referenced for the Scrum Events. Sprint Planning is used to craft a Sprint Goal. The Daily Scrum is used by the “The Development Team [..] to inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal”. The Sprint Review is about inspecting the Increment that resulted from work on the Sprint Goal, while the Sprint Retrospective is about inspecting how the team collaborated to do that work. And to further emphasize the point, the guide notes that “Scrum users must frequently inspect Scrum artifacts and progress toward a Sprint Goal to detect undesirable variances”.

This helps us understand three important purposes of Sprint Goals:

  1. They give guidance during the Sprint on the objective that the Scrum Team wants to achieve in the Sprint, as well as why that is important;
  2. They help the Development Team focus on what (kind of) work is important, and what is not;
  3. They promote collaboration by giving Development Teams one clear purpose to work on, instead of separate initiatives;

We now know that Sprint Goals are vitally important in how the Scrum Framework is explained by the guide. But that doesn’t immediately tell us why. Let's see what happens when teams don’t work with Sprint Goals.

Optional note: Some people wonder why the Sprint Goal is not an artifact in Scrum if its so important. Although this question has merit, we feel that a deeper Scrum exegesis puts too much focus on the framework instead of its underlying purpose. Having a Sprint Goal is one of the rules of Scrum, as is having a shared understanding of “Done”. Neither are ‘artifacts’ according to the framework, but both are incredibly valuable to navigate complexity and all the potential confusion that entails.

What happens without Sprint Goals …

The Scrum Framework is built on the observation that product development is complex work involving a lot of problem-solving. Sprint Goals are apparently very important there. So let’s do a thought experiment and imagine a team that doesn’t make use of Sprint Goals. You’re likely to observe:

  • Without a clear and shared objective for the Sprint, a wide variety of items will be pulled from the Product Backlog during Sprint Planning. The items will be a patchwork, representing different groups of stakeholders, different functional areas or even entirely different products or platforms. In effect, the Scrum Team is implicitly creating many different promises to many different stakeholders (Product Owner included);
  • Without there being a shared objective, known both to the team and its stakeholders, the Sprint Backlog is likely what Development Teams implicitly (or explicitly) commit to instead. Each item acts as a promise of something to deliver by the end of the Sprint, regardless of its value. Scrum Teams are likely seen as “feature factories”, churning out streams of unrelated features, instead of “product development teams”;
  • Without a clear shared goal, and feeling the pressure to complete a Sprint Backlog full of unrelated items, there is no obvious incentive to collaborate. Instead, you are likely to see members of the team picking up ‘their own’ items from the Sprint Backlog and starting work on that. Self-organization will be limited and members will remain (or become increasingly) specialized in particular kinds of items;
  • With everyone in the team working mostly on their own items, the Daily Scrum takes the form of a status update where members announce what they’ve been working on and what they plan to work on. You will hear more “I” than “We”. And communication will be more about taking turns than actively devising a collaborative strategy that involves multiple members (e.g. “If we do this … then I can …. so that you can … “);
  • Without a shared objective, and with everyone working mostly on their own items, members will complete ‘all their work’ at different moments during the Sprint. Without a shared objective to encourage people to identify opportunities to help each other, they will instead announce they have nothing to do. They start work on items elsewhere on the Product Backlog, over-engineer or spend time on work that is not relevant to the team;
  • Without a clear objective, it is hard to know who to invite for the Sprint Review. Although some stakeholders may show up to inspect individual items implemented for them, they also have to sit through all the other items being discussed. Without a way to explain the purpose of this Sprint to stakeholders other than ‘completing all the work’, it's likely that stakeholders will be increasingly less inclined to make this time available.
  • During the Sprint, unexpected problems, uncertainties and issues are likely to arise that require more time. With time being a purposefully scarce resource in a Sprint, and without a clear and shared objective, the Development Team doesn’t have guidance on how to decide where to invest time and what to let go (for now). It is likely that everything will be considered equally (un)important, resulting in more uncompleted work;
  • Without a clear and shared objective for the Sprint, it is hard to know when a Sprint is successful. A clear goal can be achieved, and then celebrated. But without such a goal, completing the entire Sprint Backlog often becomes the goal. With software development being rife with unpredictability and emerging issues, it is likely that most Sprints will have unfinished items left on the Sprint Backlog by the end of the Sprint, meaning there are hardly ever any opportunities to celebrate;
  • People are likely to complain that Scrum Events take a lot of time and feel ineffective. Without a clear and shared objective that ties all the conversations together, Scrum Events will be experienced more like ‘meetings’ where there’s a lot of talking going on that is not relevant to everyone;
  • Without Sprint Goals, each Sprint implicitly has the same purpose: complete all the work. This makes all Sprints the same, and can make people (rightfully) complain that they are artificial;

You are certainly not alone if you recognize some of these in your teams. Most of the reasons why Scrum Teams and organizations struggle with Scrum can be traced back to missing Sprint Goals and — behind that — not understanding the reasons for working with Scrum.

“A Sprint is [ … ] the smallest possible time-box for a Scrum Team to deliver a coherent set of valuable features without losing focus”

The Scrum Framework proposes to reduce the risks of complex and unpredictable work by working in small steps. Each step is a time-boxed ‘experiment’ that helps us make visible what other work is necessary. The most useful experiments here are those that make us deliver something valuable to stakeholders, and to learn from their feedback. A Sprint is the “smallest possible time-box for a Scrum Team to deliver a coherent set of valuable features without losing focus”. Instead, Sprints are often understood merely as arbitrary containers to “fill with work”.

Sprint Goals are intended to help organizations break free from this output-driven approach, where the focus lies on efficiency and getting as much work done as possible, by focusing on valuable outcomes and an experimental mindset. Let’s explore some examples of Sprint Goals to see how this is done.

Talking about the Sprint Goal during the PSMII class

 

Intermission: Examples of Sprint Goals

We once worked with a Scrum Team that developed a product for flex-workers to track time and get paid for it. The submitted hours were then validated by employees for flex agencies and processed for payment. Although we had access to users and domain experts, we used Sprints to learn how to build this product and to identify additional features as we went. Below are the Sprint Goals for the first three Sprints:

Sprint 1: “This Sprint exists to set up our deployment infrastructure to deploy a secure, working login page.”

We started the first Sprint with an empty canvas. With only two weeks to go, and aiming to deploy to production continuously, we decided to focus on setting up and configuring all the required infrastructure (both in terms of servers and code) to deploy a working login page. This also required us to implement OpenID and secure the application.

Sprint 2: “This Sprint exists to use-test the interface for entering hours”

For the second Sprint, we were eager to test our ideas for creating a more user-friendly hour-registration interface — one of the competitive advantages of the product. Going into the Sprint, we only had a rough sketch from our designer. We pulled all the required work from the Product Backlog (design, testing & deployment included) that we could complete in a Sprint. However, we soon discovered that creating the interface took far more time than expected. So we worked with the Product Owner to narrow the scope of the Sprint Backlog and decided to focus only on entering hours for the current week.

Sprint 3: “This Sprint exists to allow flex agency employees to validate the hours submitted this week.”

For the third Sprint, we wanted to expand the workflow by allowing employees from flex agencies to log in and validate submitted hours. During the Sprint, we encountered many issues with the authentication platform we used (OpenID). Members of the team swarmed on this issue, with a member from another team also jumping in. Sustained development continued for another 16 Sprints, and the product is still in use.

These examples, though not perfect, illustrate how Sprint Goals are not a result of a Sprint Backlog, but rather their starting point. Before starting development on the product, we already spent time with the team to identify likely objectives for the first Sprints.

Reasons for not having Sprint Goals

Up to this point, we’ve seen how important Sprint Goals are to Scrum. We’ve also seen some examples. Yet, most teams don’t use them. Below are some of the reasons we hear most often:

  • Product Owners don’t have the mandate to decide what goes on the Product Backlog and in what order. Instead, they are required to pass on “feature requests” or issues from stakeholders;
  • Product Owners don’t have a vision or strategy for the product that guides the formulation of objectives and Sprint Goals;
  • Scrum Teams struggle with the formulation of objectives and Sprint Goals when their Product Backlogs span thousands of items. How do you decide what is important then?;
  • Scrum Teams may be too large, making stakeholders and the Product Owner scramble for enough work to keep everyone busy;
  • Scrum Teams may work on different products or projects at the same time, making it hard to identify one singular goal for a Sprint;

“Scrum Teams may work on different products or projects at the same time, making it hard to identify one singular goal for a Sprint.”

  • Sprints may be too short or too long, making it hard to define concrete, tangible Sprint Goal that can be achieved within a Sprint;
  • Scrum Teams may be organized as ‘component teams’, working only on certain layers or components of the application (e.g. database, a specific web service or the UI). This makes it hard to craft Sprint Goals that explain the functional purpose of a Sprint;
  • During Sprint Planning, Scrum Teams often start with the Sprint Backlog and try to reverse-engineer a Sprint Goal from there;
  • Some teams do work that is not suited to the time-boxed and purpose-driven nature of Sprints. For example, Support Teams that are responsible for many different products or services probably won’t benefit from using Sprints as ‘value-creation timeboxes’;

You may find yourself, your Scrum Team or your organization using one or more of these reasons. Save perhaps for the last one, each of these is an impediment to working empirically.

Tips

Helping Product Owners think in terms of objectives for Sprints, and then turning them into Sprint Goals together with the Scrum Team is challenging. But taking this challenge head-on, instead of ignoring it, is vital to working empirically with Scrum and to create high-performing Scrum Teams. The following tips help:

  • Help Product Owners plan ahead by identifying potential objectives for upcoming Sprints. We like to ask Product Owners tell the ‘story of their Sprints’: “First we will [objective A] to allow us to [objective B] so that we can [objective C] … ” and so on. Then, identify what items should go on the Product Backlog to make those objectives possible. This helps shift Product Owners and teams more into a strategic mode than simply listing all the work;
  • You can use the Liberating Structure Nine Whys during Sprint Planning to help Scrum Teams determine the purpose of the Sprint. You can use the items on the top of the Product Backlog and keep asking “Why are these important to you…?”;
  • As a Scrum Master, you can ask powerful questions to help Product Owners dig deeper into the “Why” of their decisions, like: “If the entire Product Backlog was lost, what would be the first things you would bring back at this moment in time? Why?”, “What do you hope this objective makes possible for stakeholders or in this organization?” or “What opportunity would be lost if don’t do this item this Sprint?”;

“If the entire Product Backlog was lost, what would be the first things you would bring back at this moment in time? Why?”

  • The Sprint Review offers potential objectives for the next Sprint(s) when you make good use of this event to gather feedback from stakeholders and to debrief together. A Liberating Structure like What, So What, Now What is helpful here because it asks groups to start from observations, then interpret those and finally decide on potential next steps that made sense;
  • Use a template to craft Sprint Goals: “This Sprint exists in order to …” or “This Sprint, we promise to … “. Generally speaking, this sentence shouldn’t contain ‘and’ or comma’s to chain together multiple objectives;
  • Make your Sprint Goal transparent by hanging it in the Team Room or putting it above the Sprint Backlog. Roman Pichler has created a nice template for crafting Sprint Goal that can help you do this;
  • Begin each Scrum Event by stating the Sprint Goal and by tying it to the purpose of the event;
  • Don’t worry if you can’t relate all the items on a Sprint Backlog directly to the Sprint Goal. Sometimes, there may be a compelling reason to do some work this Sprint even though it doesn’t align with the Sprint Goal (e.g. a planning issue or an external dependency). Be sceptical of accepting such work though, and ask “What is lost if we do this next Sprint?” or “How we will make sure to keep the focus on the Sprint Goal?”;
  • If your work does not involve software- or product development, the Scrum Guide gives guidance by stating that a Sprint Goal can be “any other coherence that causes the Development Team to work together rather than on separate initiatives”. In other words, find Sprint Goals that offer guidance during the Sprint and promote collaboration in your team;

“Find Sprint Goals that offer guidance during the Sprint and promote collaboration in your team.”

Concluding thoughts

When teams start working with Scrum, working with Sprint Goals is often at the very end of the list of things to do. Most of the Scrum Masters we meet in our classes and work admit that they don’t use Sprint Goals with their teams. It's often experienced as too hard, too difficult and sometimes “impossible in our organization”. Its easier to start with the roles, artifacts, and events.

In this post, we showed how Sprint Goals are an integral part of how the Scrum Framework helps teams to navigate complex work. By its very nature, complex work requires teams to continuously make decisions about value, what to spend time on what let go of (for now). Sprint Goals offer much-needed guidance for the decisions. Without them, the whole framework unravels; Scrum Events lose their purpose, Scrum Teams have little reason to collaborate and organizations don’t start to think in terms of value.

“The lack of Sprint Goals is one of the biggest impediments facing Scrum Teams today.”

The lack of Sprint Goals — a singular purpose for a Sprint — is one of the biggest impediments facing Scrum Teams today. Although creating them is initially sometimes incredibly hard, it's exactly the kind of challenge that Scrum Masters should go looking for. We encourage you to do so!

Support
Check our other writing on Medium. If you like our free materials, meetups, podcasts and tools, please consider supporting us. You can already support us with $1/month. Find out more on patreon.com/liberators 

What did you think about this post?

Comments (29)


Stefan
10:12 am September 25, 2019

Great article.
What would you recommend for 2 scrum teams working on the same product. Would you create a shared sprint goal for the 2 teams or would you rather define 1 sprint goal for each team?


Mouhcine Otmani
12:47 pm September 25, 2019

Hello Stefan,
I think it´s better and should be for each Team it´s own Sprint Goal, it depend always of the items what the team gets from the Backlog, but boath of the team should has the same Product vision.

Best Regard


Christiaan
02:32 pm September 25, 2019

Thanks Stefan. That's a wonderful question. There's too much context involved that I am unfamiliar with to give you a good answer for this. Are these teams working on the same parts of the product? Do they have one Product Owner? How much do they need to collaborate during the Sprint?

What might help is to go back to the beginning; how does having different Sprint Goals help these teams work together to create one Done increment for the product they are working on every Sprint?


Christiaan
02:36 pm September 25, 2019

Thanks for responding to Stefan, Mouhcine.

I would challenge your assumption that the Sprint Goal depends on the items that teams get from the Product Backlog. Not sure if you mean it as this, but it seems you are saying that teams should take the PB as is, take the top of it (and what they can complete in a Sprint) and formulate a Sprint Goal out of that. I would actually suggest the reverse. Start with a goal, then re-order the Product Backlog as needed and take the top part of what is possible in a Sprint.


Mouhcine Otmani
03:07 pm September 25, 2019

Hello Christian, thanks for your answer,

i think that the teams are not resposible for re-ording the PB & the PB should be re-ording ( refeinment & priorisation ) from the Product Owner bevor the sprint planing, that means the teams should takes items from a re-ordeing PB and formulate the sprintGoal out of the selected items.


Christiaan
03:24 pm September 25, 2019

Lets see. Where in the Scrum Guide does it say that Development Teams are not allowed to do that? And if we start from the purpose of Scrum - creating a "Done" increment every Sprint that delivers value to stakeholders - how does that relate to not allowing that?

I think there's a risk here of falling in Scrum Guide exegesis. Lets not weigh the words, but the intention behind the words. So perhaps you can help me find where in the Scrum Guide it specifically prevents Scrum Teams from doing what I suggested.


Stefan
03:44 pm September 25, 2019

Hi Christiaan, thanks for your response.
I can provide you some context. We work on the same product and generally also on the same parts of the product. We only have one Product Owner. On the sprint planning, however, we sometimes select different parts of the product to work on so that we do not step on each others toes. In some sprints, as in the current, we have a quite nice split between user stories on the same context.

So far, we always used one sprint goal and for sure this helps the team working closely together. But in case we work on different parts of the product, the one sprint goal doesn't make really sense because this means that one team is not actively contributing to the sprint goal. On the other hand, sometimes it's quite challenging to put two teams on the same topic without having a lot of coordination issues.


Christiaan
04:28 pm September 25, 2019

I don't think there's a right answer here necessarily, Stefan. I would always encourage teams to work on one increment together, instead of spreading their focus. This is not because Scrum says so, but because lowering your WIP is a really good way to optimize systems. And if teams work on different parts of the product, in a sense their WIP is already higher than when you have both teams working on one increment together.

But yes, I can see the vast challenges that can bring. Ideally, I would encourage people to explore what is making that difficult and start fixing those impediments, as these are the ones you really want to solve. Working around those impediments is essentially a way to hack the system, but not fix it.

Also, if both teams are capable of delivering done software to their users, and inspection can take place with them every Sprint, then what's the immediate harm? Celebrate that you can achieve that and see how you can do even better. Release continuously?


Mouhcine Otmani
12:57 pm September 26, 2019

there is no sentence in the Scrum Guide not allowed that, at the same time there is no sentence allowed it but in the Scrum Guide we finde clearly defined rolles, like what has the Product Owner to do and also the Dev. Team.
if they would like to work together than it is another case and it is possible and fine.

Yes of corse to crate a Done increment every Sprint that delivers value to stakeholders, but the Dev. Team are not involved in all meetings with the Stakeholder & it´s not there task to search in the Market to find whitch fuatures are more importent and whitch not.

I think we can speak about this case as log as we wont, it´s situation dependant.
but very important to know that if the Dev.Team makes Product Backlog refinment without the P.O, it´s higt risk to do not deliver the value what the Market need.


Stefan
04:00 pm September 26, 2019

You are right, Christiaan. Thanks for sharing your view on this.


ya sim
06:38 pm September 26, 2019

The reason why Sprint Goal is not Scrum artifact is probably to avoid loosing focus by shifting it from the implicit goal to complete specific set of Sprint Backlog items committed to achieve product increment to some superficial formulation of goal slogan.
Imagine Sprint BLI-s include both 1. ..Infrastructure to deploy a secure, working login page and 2. use-test the interface for entering hours. Completion of both is a clear goal for the team , so why waste time creating slogan like "..do login and allow time entry".

Assumption "Without a shared objective to encourage people to identify opportunities to help each other, they will instead announce they have nothing to do. They start work on items elsewhere on the Product Backlog, over-engineer or spend time on work that is not relevant to the team" is wrong. All Scrum member works as a part of team, therefore when one completes their tasks, they would pick another task from the Sprint BLI-s as they are the Goal, being committed and having higher priority. So freed up developer would 1st help other members. Only if there is no task to work productively, new story would be pulled in to Sprint. So although it is nice to pick coherent - related-single -feature PBI-s to Sprint, it is not mandatory and might be less efficient comparing to other criteria of PBI "Ready", Agree?


Christiaan
08:13 pm September 26, 2019

In any case, I would focus on what we're trying to achieve with Scrum - not so much the nitty gritty details of how to interpret certain elements of the Scrum Framework and turn them into 'thou shalt' or 'thou shalt nots'. I think that gives a question to most answers about Scrum.


Mouhcine Otmani
06:51 am September 27, 2019

that´s true, i am agree, anyway it´s always important to see and know how other organisation working with Scrum Framework.
Focus is to get more Value und be after every sprint a bit better than bevor :-)

Thx Christian for your blog, it´s realy good


Alessandro Bignami
12:42 pm October 30, 2019

Hi Christiaan, stunning article!
It describes perfectly the situation -and the consequences- that I have where I'm working.

I'll try to follow your suggestions (I've already tried some of them) for trying to change things... but, while it's true that a small grain of sand rolling down a hill can generate an avalanche, it's also true that changing the way of thinking of a big Company (or even of a Department) it is not always easy (or possible). That's a challenge!

Thank you for your insights!


bolarin
01:34 pm October 30, 2019

This is a great article. I like the way you presented the facts in here and i look forward to implementing the suggestions on my team, we before now have not been benefiting from the use of sprint goals.

Thank you for the artivle


Bryn Groves
07:29 pm November 8, 2019

My problem with this article is that it talks about how bad it is not to have a sprint goal and that it shouldn't just be a collection of items, and how hard it is (at first) to craft a sprint goal, and never really talks about how to achieve one (apart from suggesting some templates). Our sprints generally consist of one or two stories from a larger epic (to be worked on by one or two developers) and then the rest of it is bug fixes and improvements. How do you make a cohesive sprint goal out of that? Either you forget about the improvements/bug fixes (as many have suggested to me) and have a sprint goal that doesn't include all your team, or don't let anybody work on anything except the current epic? or... ?


Christiaan
11:06 am January 10, 2020

That's a good point Bryn. We did it mostly as a matter of focus. How to craft good Sprint Goals is an entire series of posts in its own right. The main point we wanted to make here is that not having Sprint Goals, or struggling to craft them, is a tell-tale sign that something is not right. Its a good opportunity to put on your Sherlock hat and explore what may be going on. Perhaps the Product Owner doesn't have a clear vision, and every Sprint is just a bunch of stuff from the Product Backlog without any coherence, or the team is too large or too small, doesn't have all the skills it needs. Or Scrum isn't the right framework because the work isn't really that complex.

In your case - without knowing much about your context - I would wonder what creates this distribution between bug fixes & improvements on the one hand and working on one or two items on the other. I would wonder why there are two items and not more. How is refinement going in your team? Can the work be broken down further somehow?


Bryn Groves
07:40 pm January 13, 2020

We've been given a mandate by management to only spend a certain percentage of our time working on features (it probably accounts for 30% of our budget), the rest of the time to be spent on bug fixes and/or code refactor work. The reason why there are typically only one or two feature items per sprint is that (a) having everybody working on the same area of code means more chance of merge errors, (b) the feature items often have dependencies, i.e. we can't work on part B of the feature until part A is completed and (c) we have to allow for time to be spent on bug fixes etc.

My product owner, who has a lot of experience with this kind of stuff, is rather stymied as am I. We could just front-load all the feature work in the PI so that everybody is working on that, but there's good reasons for not doing that (as mentioned above) and would leave us with several sprints where we were working on nothing but a disjointed list of bugs (which again would not yield a cohesive sprint goal). We could ignore the bugs and just focus on the feature work when crafting a goal, but then the goal would encompass 30% of the total work done on the sprint and would involve one or two developers at best. I just don't see a real good solution here.


Moussa El Hajraoui
01:36 pm June 22, 2020

Just take a little time to step back and analyze a couple of sprints data.
Don't forget, when embracing Scum (agility), you're in empiricism.
And it's more suitable for uncertain and complex projects.
Ask some questions about the whole processes:
Is Scrum suitable for your business? Think Kanban/lean/Kaizen.
I think one user story is the sprint goal.
For two independent user stories, the goal can be: deliver them.
More heterogenic user stories can not make single product but the same outcome.
You start by a simple and general goal about user stories: Deliver at the end of sprint.
Think about if the PO is helping for this.
Imagine in an ERP software with 20 modules and some 180 connected functionalities, without a federated sprint goals no sprint will output a valuable outcome.
You will find a lot of improvements Track
Important: Where is the scrum master? His main mission is to enact Scrum !


Bryn Groves
06:17 am August 5, 2020

The sprint goal cannot simply be "deliver them". The scrum guide quite clearly states that the sprint goal should NOT just be "do this collection of tasks the PO has set". There has to be a cohesive overarching goal statement. At least that's what all the experts say. The problem is I cannot find one. I have sat down with the PO and explained the importance of a sprint goal and his argument is basically the fact that you can't make a goal out of a disparate collection of tasks. As you can see from the comment below, I explained all this to the author of this webpage and have yet to receive a response.


SK
02:22 pm December 24, 2020

Hi Bryan,

Your company has givent you an interesting mandate; however, it is probably similar for most mature companies that deal with existing products, and not one that is creating a completely new product.

I would have thought that bug fixing be classed as development support work, thus not requiring a sprint, as that is how my current company operates?

Of course, any bugs found whilst developing a new feature (it should be possible to create a goal for the feature) could be added to that features current sprint, or if neccessary, added to the product backlog so that it has a chance of being picked for the next sprint, or simply marked as a known issue and then handled via development suport post product release (depending on the bugs severity).


simplymincy
01:45 pm January 2, 2021

Hi Bryn,
Your problem sounds very similar to a problem we faced last year. While we have a little more weight on working on feature work, bugs and support tickets were still a part of a sprint. The thing we realized is that our sprint goals were often related to the feature work within our sprint and the non feature work, while still part of the sprint, was not worked on until the sprint goal was completed or at the very least in good enough shape to feel it would be completed by the end of the sprint. Other times we found that a bug or support request was urgent enough to be our sprint goal and therefore we would focus on completing that first. It really just depends on that sprint. So, let's say we have a sprint goal of "This sprint exists to upload image to server," and we have 3 stories related directly to that work, 2 stories adjacently related to that goal, and 1 story not related to that goal at all in our sprint, we would try to work on the stories in our sprint in that order. Sprint goal, sprint adjacent, and non sprint goal related.


Garry Taylor
12:23 pm January 3, 2021

This is a great article and opens up the mind to think about the problems as Scrum should.
We have a mix of new projects and maintenance within a large monolithic application for internal services and a small collection of Microservices for external services.
I feel that Scrum works great for our projects but we tend to struggle with Scrum for maintenance as the collection of hodgepodge PBIs mean the Development Team work as individuals; like the opening scene on the Matrix where Neo is in his cubicle. This article nails it, our developers have status meetings and Demos of features, then shrug for a retro.

However, the article has given me some ideas to approach this problem. For example, our backlog is mature/large and has collections of items that fit within the same area of the system. So it's possible to create a Sprint dedicated at value for a given area of the business. Now, some of them items are so low down the PBI that they will never be done. However, if we group work together into a "sprint Goal" then the orphaned PBI could be given life again.


Sam P
01:06 pm January 6, 2021

I'm reading this thread with interest. We recently restructured our teams as part of a set of broader changes and we looked again at how we handle requests which aren't part of the planned feature work.

Having read around the topic quite a lot, we decided not to drop all the bug fixing onto a separate support team although that had been my first thought, perhaps with people occasionally rotating out of the support team and into the Scrum team. The experience of others suggested that that approach would not lead to better products (why avoid bugs if someone else has to fix them) and would not be very efficient (generally harder to fix bugs you didn't write and the offender is less likely to learn their mistake so will write more). From my own experience I'm aware that nobody would want to be in the bug fixing role and we would struggle with staff retention.

Where we have ended up at the moment is with all new bugs from production plus all enhancement requests for areas not in our medium-term development plans going into a separate "triage" backlog. A small group with PO and Scrum Master representation meets regularly to organise those into "do now", "defer" (may do in next 6 months) and "don't do".

The "do now" work is put into the backlog of one of the teams for refinement/sprint planning. This has so far represented around 5-10% of incoming triage items and a very small percentage of the work going through the Scrum teams.

The "defer" work probably accounts for around 30% and we expect much of it to be moved to "don't do" when we review it over time.

The "don't do" is the remainder and it is explained to the requester that they can request it again later if it still has value (unless it's a solidly bad idea), but often we are suggesting workarounds that are semi-permanent.

The aim with this is to try to keep distractions away from as many Scrum team members as possible so they can focus on delivering value. I can't wrap my head around being forced to spend a fixed and large percentage of time on maintenance tasks, but organisations' needs differ wildly.


Sai D.
10:45 pm April 4, 2021

Seperate the 2 user stories and the bug fixing.
Is the bug fixing seperate from the 2 user stories, you have 1 additonal user story.
If not independent, then add the bug fixing to the 2 user stories, then max 2 user stories.

Make a shorter sprint. 1 for each user story. So divide the long sprint into 2-3 shorter sprints.

Each user story has a purpose. "As a user ... to achieve [purpose]".
Enabling this user purpose is your team`s sprint purpos ergo your SPRINT GOAL!


Bryn Groves
10:05 am April 15, 2021

i don't think you quite grasp the situation. in the 8 or so years we've been doing agile, our team has NEVER had a time when we're all working on the same story. we simply couldn't have a shorter sprint with one story - it would still only be one or two people working on it, what would the rest of the people do? the sprint goal is supposed to be a TEAM goal, not "fred will complete this story and the rest of you just do whatever". that's not a sprint goal!


Sai D.
06:29 pm April 16, 2021

Probably you lead the 1 project team in the world, where SCRUM is just not for you and your dudes?


Bryn Groves
07:16 pm April 18, 2021

lol yeah - my team is unique *eye-roll*


ivan basilio coronado arquinig
06:03 pm January 7, 2023

No sabía que tan importante eran los objetivos de sprint. En mi organización los PO no tienen el control sobre que elementos deben estar en el Product Backlog, se limitan a transmitir características o algún problema reportado por un área.