Skip to main content

Scrum isn’t perfect

September 6, 2017

'Scrum isn't perfect' is something I hear quite frequently, be it as an excuse not to stick to the few rules Scrum has or not to use it at all. The thing is though that no set of rules is perfect, but we're used to stick to them anyway. So why not do that with Scrum as well?

American football

Let's start with an example of imperfect rules that we stick to: sports rules. I'm a Seahawks fan and I watch all of their games. American Football has a lot of rules and a number of people are present to make sure they are enacted during the game. While these rules were made up over the years and based on experience, they are never perfect for every single scenario. Does that mean there's a case to make for not sticking to the rules because they're not suitable? Or should we just accept that that's the rules are sometimes imperfect and roll with them? With sports, we usually accept them (perhaps not always happily, depending on which side you're on).

Scrum

The thing with many Scrum implementations is that it has become acceptable not to stick to the few rules that Scrum has. Even though a team has usually made the choice to stick to them. The rules in Scrum were made up over the years and based on experience, just as with American Football. They were even changed over time when necessary (with the last modification being the addition of the Scrum Values), just like with American Football. But they are not adhered to, unlike with American Football.

What happens in American Football when you decide not to stick to the rules is anarchy. In Scrum that's no different: the benefits from Scrum will exhibit themselves best as long as the few rules it has are followed. Not doing that is a disservice to your team, your organization and your customers.

Scrum isn't perfect. It both has shortcomings and makes them transparent. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't stick to the rules. Accept the imperfection of the rules and benefit from Scrum.


What did you think about this post?

Comments (8)


Jason Grundy
03:14 pm September 6, 2017

This is a bad analogy because in a sport each team and the fans need to have a common understanding of the rules else they can't play. However as a project team the rules are up to the members of that team. The goal is to be as productive and happy as possible. I have always recommended following the rules initially but over time once you really understand them you can diverge as appropriate. As you correctly observed it's not possible to come up with a set of rules that work in every circumstance and so why stick with something that isn't working for you?


Ramsay Ashby
04:12 pm September 6, 2017

Agree with Jason that this analogy doesn't really hold true.

If the rules truly are not working for a team, then it doesn't make sense to follow them 'just because they are the rules'. Whilst playing football is an end in itself, the same can not be said of Scrum.

That said, when you truly digest and understand the rules of Scrum I feel that the likelihood of concluding that they 'aren't perfect' diminishes because your understanding of the principles for which they stand increases, and you start seeing the rules in a different light. In the complex environments for which Scrum is intended, the 'principles' that underpin the rules are pretty much golden, partly due to the vast scope of implementation options.

Scrum is not a 'silver bullet', not least because it isn't a bullet at all. But it is a highly flexible and adaptable process framework.

If teams find that the rules don't work, then my first action would be to understand 'why?'. Are the rules themselves truly the impediment, or is it that they identified an issue that needs to be resolved. It is often said that Scrum is a 'problem finding framework' because of its incredible ability to shine a spotlight on problems.

If the rules truly are at fault, I would question whether the team [is still] in that complex domain and solving the complex problems that Scrum is designed for. If a project has moved from a complex to complicated state (perhaps moving from active development to 'BAU') then I think they absolutely should break the rules, because fundamentally Scrum isn't intended to solve these problems any more.

I'm sure that there are circumstances where the rules genuinely do become an impediment, but I think that this is actually pretty rare. Most of the teams that I come across that say they have 'moved beyond the rules' have in fact moved beyond the practices that they learnt on their CSM course, and act in a way that is purer and truer to the rules.


Can H.
08:10 am September 7, 2017

the analogy is not really correct because sports rules are made to make the game fair for 2 sides but a project doesn't have the same dynamics. In projects the teams sets the rules to make for the best for their team and project. With all this said, I agree that sticking to the rules does benefit a lot for new teams or new projects. However, after reaching a maturity level, adding new rules appropriately according to company/project dynamics will benefit the team more than doing harm.


Maarten Kossen
05:39 pm September 7, 2017

Thank you all for the excellent replies and feedback. I truly appreciate it.

You are correct that the analogy doesn't hold from every angle. The sole reason I'm using this analogy is to make a point about sticking to the rules even when they're not perfect. Rules always have their imperfections.

As Jason points out correctly, many product development teams are in the extraoridinarily luxurious position to be able to select a different set of rules. When warranted, that could be a very good option.

My key point is (and I'm looking for a way to bring that across better) that once a team has decided to start with Scrum and stick to the rules they frequently stop using them at the first roadblock they hit. To me, that is a totally different scenario than one of an experienced team that through inspection and adaptation has decided to select a different approach (and set of rules).

If you have any feedback on how I could have made that point come across any clearer, feel free to reach out to me.


Alan Larimer
05:11 pm September 27, 2017

Transparency: Everyone involved (team members, fans, officials, coaches) needs to have a shared understanding of the rules.

Scrum works in terms of products. It can work in a project context, but usually much agility is lost.

The goal is to produce valuable, working, quality software One can be very productive yet yield little results.. Executing in a healthy environment will help with happiness.

Be sure that you don't give up on the sport: http://ronjeffries.com/xpro...


Alan Larimer
05:14 pm September 27, 2017

Transparency: Everyone involved (team members, fans, officials, coaches) needs to have a shared understanding of the rules.

Scrum works in terms of products. It can work in a project context, but usually much agility is lost.

What additional rules are added with maturity?


Alan Larimer
05:17 pm September 27, 2017

Thank you for the article. It reminds me of Ron Jeffries: http://ronjeffries.com/xpro...


Alan Larimer
03:53 pm November 18, 2017

@allocine-fr-8df0066caf1280d16953e5b9ad50aeda:disqus
What additional rules are added with maturity?