Proper Scrum vs. Ad Hoc Scrum

Executive Summary:

Richard Banks wrote back in February about his failed attempt to successfully introduce Scrum into his organization, concluding that “if you are planning on implementing Scrum you need to do it treat it as an all-or-nothing change.” Richard had introduced parts of Scrum but didn’t follow the rules. He “allowed ad-hoc requests to be actioned, allowed staff to be pulled off for other non-development work and as a result failed to get the team to own the process and to own the delivery of results.” He also held the roles of ProductOwner and ScrumMaster which “led to conflicts of interest over what was best for the company over what was best for the team.”

Since then Richard started from scratch and tried to implement it properly. 9 months later, Richard reports that Scrum is “not only well implemented in product development but the principles of scrum are starting to filter through to other areas of the business.” Richard’s blog summarizes the key areas that he’s noticed Scrum cause positive change in his organization

Key Takeaways:

  • More Ownership
  • Less Centralized Management
  • More Planning
  • Less Staff Turnover
  • More Customer Focus
  • A Better Product
  • Organizational Change

Full Case Study:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Prove you are human *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>