Daily standup vs. Micro-management
Why isn't the daily scrum considered to be micromanagement?
Under any other circumstances expecting to get a daily update from developers would be considered micromanagement. Maybe even pico-management. (did I just invent a term?)
Even a weekly update was considered borderline micromanagement by many.
What changed that the daily scrum is acceptable, both to the engineers and the Project Managers?
(Future question: can this change (if it exists) be used for more frequent updates in a non-scrum setup?)
scrum daily-scrum micro-management
add a comment |
Why isn't the daily scrum considered to be micromanagement?
Under any other circumstances expecting to get a daily update from developers would be considered micromanagement. Maybe even pico-management. (did I just invent a term?)
Even a weekly update was considered borderline micromanagement by many.
What changed that the daily scrum is acceptable, both to the engineers and the Project Managers?
(Future question: can this change (if it exists) be used for more frequent updates in a non-scrum setup?)
scrum daily-scrum micro-management
11
The daily standup is a intra-team coordination meeting, not a status pull. pm.stackexchange.com/a/6657/4271
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
yesterday
add a comment |
Why isn't the daily scrum considered to be micromanagement?
Under any other circumstances expecting to get a daily update from developers would be considered micromanagement. Maybe even pico-management. (did I just invent a term?)
Even a weekly update was considered borderline micromanagement by many.
What changed that the daily scrum is acceptable, both to the engineers and the Project Managers?
(Future question: can this change (if it exists) be used for more frequent updates in a non-scrum setup?)
scrum daily-scrum micro-management
Why isn't the daily scrum considered to be micromanagement?
Under any other circumstances expecting to get a daily update from developers would be considered micromanagement. Maybe even pico-management. (did I just invent a term?)
Even a weekly update was considered borderline micromanagement by many.
What changed that the daily scrum is acceptable, both to the engineers and the Project Managers?
(Future question: can this change (if it exists) be used for more frequent updates in a non-scrum setup?)
scrum daily-scrum micro-management
scrum daily-scrum micro-management
edited yesterday
tiagoperes
37719
37719
asked yesterday
Danny Schoemann
1,41911431
1,41911431
11
The daily standup is a intra-team coordination meeting, not a status pull. pm.stackexchange.com/a/6657/4271
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
yesterday
add a comment |
11
The daily standup is a intra-team coordination meeting, not a status pull. pm.stackexchange.com/a/6657/4271
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
yesterday
11
11
The daily standup is a intra-team coordination meeting, not a status pull. pm.stackexchange.com/a/6657/4271
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
yesterday
The daily standup is a intra-team coordination meeting, not a status pull. pm.stackexchange.com/a/6657/4271
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
yesterday
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
The Daily Scrum is not an update-to-management meeting!
From the Scrum Guide (emphasis mine):
The Daily Scrum is a 15-minute time-boxed event for the Development Team [...] This optimizes team collaboration and performance [...] The Scrum Master ensures that the Development Team has the meeting, but the Development Team is responsible for conducting the Daily Scrum. [...] The Daily Scrum is an internal meeting for the Development Team. If others are present, the Scrum Master ensures that they do not disrupt the meeting.
If someone outside the Team is asking for progress reports or otherwise attempting to micromanage during the Daily Scrum, the Scrum Master should request for him/her to stop.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone outside the Team during the meeting (you can tell this if they always face someone during the meeting) even without being asked, then that someone should be removed from the meeting to remove this temptation.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone inside the Team during the meeting (such as the Scrum Master), then steps should be taken by the Scrum Master to discourage this. For example, the Scrum Master could make certain to move about the room during the meeting, to prevent the person speaking from being able to see him/her (and, thus, force the person speaking to shift his/her attention to the group at large).
5
Sadly, in my experience this is very unusual. The Project Manager or their manager is almost always serving as Scrum Master on projects I've been involved with.
– catfood
yesterday
3
Or sometimes the Scrum Master is in practice "standing in" for the management.
– davidbak
yesterday
@davidbak A fair point. I added a paragraph.
– Sarov
yesterday
1
I’m now imagining a scrum master playing hide-and-seek during stand-ups. Thanks for that! :)
– Ian MacDonald
14 hours ago
add a comment |
In addition to Sarov's excellent answer, there is also the purpose of the meeting.
The daily standup is not a management engagement. Neither the Scrum Master nor any other project or senior manager is doing any managing during the daily standup. I see this even stronger than Sarov does - not only is management not being reported to, there is also no flow from management towards the team. Nobody tells the team what to do or how to do it during the daily standup. There is no management activity going on during the daily standup and that is why it isn't micro-management - because it isn't management at all.
That doesn't mean this culture as-written is strictly put into practice in your environment, so your confusion might very well result from the practice being different from the book. If management has taken over the daily standup and is using it to micro-manage the team, then indeed the daily standup has become micro-management. If you continue to run it in that way, then yes you are engaging in micro-management. But it shouldn't be called the daily standup anymore.
add a comment |
If you ask this question, or even if you have troubles answering it, you are likely a victim of dark scrum. A daily scrum meeting, done right, has no micro-management.
Terms have power, and dark scrum is one of these potentially important terms that I would like to see spread. Scrum was never made for this kind of micro-management, and its mis-use can have dire consequences for developers, projects and scrum itself (as a concept). If you can, consider using the term "dark scrum".
from the linked page(ronjeffries.com),
EDIT: I emphasize that below is a description of "dark scrum":
Every day, the team is supposed to get together and organize the day’s work. This practice, the “Daily Scrum”, is imposed on the typical team. There might be one person in the room, the ScrumMaster, who has been told how it should be done. The programmers haven’t been told. Quite often, even the Product Owner hasn’t been told. Almost certainly other power holders haven’t been told.
But the power holder already knows his job. His job is to stay on top of what everyone is doing, make sure they’re doing the right things, and redirect them if they’re not. How convenient that there’s a mandatory meeting where he can do that, every single day!
The result: instead of the team rallying around their joint mission and sorting out a good approach for the day, someone else drags information of of them, processes it in their head, and then tells everyone what to do. Since nothing ever goes quite as we expected yesterday morning, this improper activity often comes with a lot of blame-casting and tension.
Dark Scrum oppresses the team every day. Self-organization cannot emerge.
New contributor
3
Frankly, most engineers do not need to get together and organize the day’s work EVERY day. These are intelligent educated adults who can deal with getting organized on a weekly (or even monthly) basis. I don't see why this answers the question, but I +1'd you for the new term " dark scrum."
– Danny Schoemann
yesterday
3
@DannySchoemann, everyone certainly does not agree with the concept of SCRUM to begin with. You seem to have sound arguments against it. Personally I think the pros out-weigh the cons. regarding the frequency of stand-up meetings, I agree that every-day is not always necessary. Every second day or so seems to work better imho.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
2
@DannySchoemann most engineers don't want to get together and organize every day, but they really should. The closer they work together, the more effective they become as a team. If you can spend a week without communicating with your team, you're at risk of having way too big blocks of work being done without verification that you're still going in the right direction.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann if you're in constant contact with each other, then why you do say engineers do not need to get together to organize the day's work? It sounds more like you've moved beyond the need for a Daily Scrum than that having one is inherently not useful.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann, There may be something critical (for good or bad) that requires the groups attention. Maybe the database stored procedures are missing a feature that you cannot implement alone, maybe your expertise is urgently needed due to a new task. Maybe you are the only one who can spot this, but you do it only when you convene at the scrum meeting.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
|
show 8 more comments
When the "stand-up" is properly orchestrated, it's a free exchange of ideas about each other's work. It's meant to enforce collaboration, not confrontation. Unless your manager is actively developing with you (they usually are) they should not be in the meeting.
Too many times have I worked on projects where people who worked across the isle from each other could have saved the other person 6 months' work.
New contributor
add a comment |
The daily scrum is not to be considered micromanagement because it does not target any individual.
Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it.
Furthermore it is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing - so no feel of microm.
New contributor
5
Not sure I agree with your first two sentences. If the Big Boss(TM) is requesting status updates from the Team every day... that's still micro-management; s/he's just micro-managing the Team, rather than individuals.
– Sarov
yesterday
@sarov The big difference is that the information only flow one way, from the team to the manager. The manager is NOT supposed to use that information to take any specific action. Which is the big difference. If the manager use the information from each daily meeting to make management decisions that would be micro management.
– MTilsted
yesterday
4
If you don't do anything with information, then what's the point of having that information in the first place...?
– Sarov
yesterday
"[I]t is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing[.]" What is your source for this? It does not seem to align with anything in the Scrum Guide.
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
18 hours ago
"Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it." Even if the whole class is playing dodgeball, the small nerdy kid that's getting picked on feels more threatened than the class bully. It's still management even if you do it in a group setting.
– Zach Lipton
14 hours ago
add a comment |
the dev team has in charge the burn-down chart as status update. In every case the PO have lot of contacts with the dev team during the sprint and he is always update from dev team in case of problem.
The Big Boss have to ask directly to the PO.
Stefano
New contributor
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "208"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpm.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f25518%2fdaily-standup-vs-micro-management%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The Daily Scrum is not an update-to-management meeting!
From the Scrum Guide (emphasis mine):
The Daily Scrum is a 15-minute time-boxed event for the Development Team [...] This optimizes team collaboration and performance [...] The Scrum Master ensures that the Development Team has the meeting, but the Development Team is responsible for conducting the Daily Scrum. [...] The Daily Scrum is an internal meeting for the Development Team. If others are present, the Scrum Master ensures that they do not disrupt the meeting.
If someone outside the Team is asking for progress reports or otherwise attempting to micromanage during the Daily Scrum, the Scrum Master should request for him/her to stop.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone outside the Team during the meeting (you can tell this if they always face someone during the meeting) even without being asked, then that someone should be removed from the meeting to remove this temptation.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone inside the Team during the meeting (such as the Scrum Master), then steps should be taken by the Scrum Master to discourage this. For example, the Scrum Master could make certain to move about the room during the meeting, to prevent the person speaking from being able to see him/her (and, thus, force the person speaking to shift his/her attention to the group at large).
5
Sadly, in my experience this is very unusual. The Project Manager or their manager is almost always serving as Scrum Master on projects I've been involved with.
– catfood
yesterday
3
Or sometimes the Scrum Master is in practice "standing in" for the management.
– davidbak
yesterday
@davidbak A fair point. I added a paragraph.
– Sarov
yesterday
1
I’m now imagining a scrum master playing hide-and-seek during stand-ups. Thanks for that! :)
– Ian MacDonald
14 hours ago
add a comment |
The Daily Scrum is not an update-to-management meeting!
From the Scrum Guide (emphasis mine):
The Daily Scrum is a 15-minute time-boxed event for the Development Team [...] This optimizes team collaboration and performance [...] The Scrum Master ensures that the Development Team has the meeting, but the Development Team is responsible for conducting the Daily Scrum. [...] The Daily Scrum is an internal meeting for the Development Team. If others are present, the Scrum Master ensures that they do not disrupt the meeting.
If someone outside the Team is asking for progress reports or otherwise attempting to micromanage during the Daily Scrum, the Scrum Master should request for him/her to stop.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone outside the Team during the meeting (you can tell this if they always face someone during the meeting) even without being asked, then that someone should be removed from the meeting to remove this temptation.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone inside the Team during the meeting (such as the Scrum Master), then steps should be taken by the Scrum Master to discourage this. For example, the Scrum Master could make certain to move about the room during the meeting, to prevent the person speaking from being able to see him/her (and, thus, force the person speaking to shift his/her attention to the group at large).
5
Sadly, in my experience this is very unusual. The Project Manager or their manager is almost always serving as Scrum Master on projects I've been involved with.
– catfood
yesterday
3
Or sometimes the Scrum Master is in practice "standing in" for the management.
– davidbak
yesterday
@davidbak A fair point. I added a paragraph.
– Sarov
yesterday
1
I’m now imagining a scrum master playing hide-and-seek during stand-ups. Thanks for that! :)
– Ian MacDonald
14 hours ago
add a comment |
The Daily Scrum is not an update-to-management meeting!
From the Scrum Guide (emphasis mine):
The Daily Scrum is a 15-minute time-boxed event for the Development Team [...] This optimizes team collaboration and performance [...] The Scrum Master ensures that the Development Team has the meeting, but the Development Team is responsible for conducting the Daily Scrum. [...] The Daily Scrum is an internal meeting for the Development Team. If others are present, the Scrum Master ensures that they do not disrupt the meeting.
If someone outside the Team is asking for progress reports or otherwise attempting to micromanage during the Daily Scrum, the Scrum Master should request for him/her to stop.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone outside the Team during the meeting (you can tell this if they always face someone during the meeting) even without being asked, then that someone should be removed from the meeting to remove this temptation.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone inside the Team during the meeting (such as the Scrum Master), then steps should be taken by the Scrum Master to discourage this. For example, the Scrum Master could make certain to move about the room during the meeting, to prevent the person speaking from being able to see him/her (and, thus, force the person speaking to shift his/her attention to the group at large).
The Daily Scrum is not an update-to-management meeting!
From the Scrum Guide (emphasis mine):
The Daily Scrum is a 15-minute time-boxed event for the Development Team [...] This optimizes team collaboration and performance [...] The Scrum Master ensures that the Development Team has the meeting, but the Development Team is responsible for conducting the Daily Scrum. [...] The Daily Scrum is an internal meeting for the Development Team. If others are present, the Scrum Master ensures that they do not disrupt the meeting.
If someone outside the Team is asking for progress reports or otherwise attempting to micromanage during the Daily Scrum, the Scrum Master should request for him/her to stop.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone outside the Team during the meeting (you can tell this if they always face someone during the meeting) even without being asked, then that someone should be removed from the meeting to remove this temptation.
If the developers are automatically reporting to someone inside the Team during the meeting (such as the Scrum Master), then steps should be taken by the Scrum Master to discourage this. For example, the Scrum Master could make certain to move about the room during the meeting, to prevent the person speaking from being able to see him/her (and, thus, force the person speaking to shift his/her attention to the group at large).
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
Sarov
8,69421841
8,69421841
5
Sadly, in my experience this is very unusual. The Project Manager or their manager is almost always serving as Scrum Master on projects I've been involved with.
– catfood
yesterday
3
Or sometimes the Scrum Master is in practice "standing in" for the management.
– davidbak
yesterday
@davidbak A fair point. I added a paragraph.
– Sarov
yesterday
1
I’m now imagining a scrum master playing hide-and-seek during stand-ups. Thanks for that! :)
– Ian MacDonald
14 hours ago
add a comment |
5
Sadly, in my experience this is very unusual. The Project Manager or their manager is almost always serving as Scrum Master on projects I've been involved with.
– catfood
yesterday
3
Or sometimes the Scrum Master is in practice "standing in" for the management.
– davidbak
yesterday
@davidbak A fair point. I added a paragraph.
– Sarov
yesterday
1
I’m now imagining a scrum master playing hide-and-seek during stand-ups. Thanks for that! :)
– Ian MacDonald
14 hours ago
5
5
Sadly, in my experience this is very unusual. The Project Manager or their manager is almost always serving as Scrum Master on projects I've been involved with.
– catfood
yesterday
Sadly, in my experience this is very unusual. The Project Manager or their manager is almost always serving as Scrum Master on projects I've been involved with.
– catfood
yesterday
3
3
Or sometimes the Scrum Master is in practice "standing in" for the management.
– davidbak
yesterday
Or sometimes the Scrum Master is in practice "standing in" for the management.
– davidbak
yesterday
@davidbak A fair point. I added a paragraph.
– Sarov
yesterday
@davidbak A fair point. I added a paragraph.
– Sarov
yesterday
1
1
I’m now imagining a scrum master playing hide-and-seek during stand-ups. Thanks for that! :)
– Ian MacDonald
14 hours ago
I’m now imagining a scrum master playing hide-and-seek during stand-ups. Thanks for that! :)
– Ian MacDonald
14 hours ago
add a comment |
In addition to Sarov's excellent answer, there is also the purpose of the meeting.
The daily standup is not a management engagement. Neither the Scrum Master nor any other project or senior manager is doing any managing during the daily standup. I see this even stronger than Sarov does - not only is management not being reported to, there is also no flow from management towards the team. Nobody tells the team what to do or how to do it during the daily standup. There is no management activity going on during the daily standup and that is why it isn't micro-management - because it isn't management at all.
That doesn't mean this culture as-written is strictly put into practice in your environment, so your confusion might very well result from the practice being different from the book. If management has taken over the daily standup and is using it to micro-manage the team, then indeed the daily standup has become micro-management. If you continue to run it in that way, then yes you are engaging in micro-management. But it shouldn't be called the daily standup anymore.
add a comment |
In addition to Sarov's excellent answer, there is also the purpose of the meeting.
The daily standup is not a management engagement. Neither the Scrum Master nor any other project or senior manager is doing any managing during the daily standup. I see this even stronger than Sarov does - not only is management not being reported to, there is also no flow from management towards the team. Nobody tells the team what to do or how to do it during the daily standup. There is no management activity going on during the daily standup and that is why it isn't micro-management - because it isn't management at all.
That doesn't mean this culture as-written is strictly put into practice in your environment, so your confusion might very well result from the practice being different from the book. If management has taken over the daily standup and is using it to micro-manage the team, then indeed the daily standup has become micro-management. If you continue to run it in that way, then yes you are engaging in micro-management. But it shouldn't be called the daily standup anymore.
add a comment |
In addition to Sarov's excellent answer, there is also the purpose of the meeting.
The daily standup is not a management engagement. Neither the Scrum Master nor any other project or senior manager is doing any managing during the daily standup. I see this even stronger than Sarov does - not only is management not being reported to, there is also no flow from management towards the team. Nobody tells the team what to do or how to do it during the daily standup. There is no management activity going on during the daily standup and that is why it isn't micro-management - because it isn't management at all.
That doesn't mean this culture as-written is strictly put into practice in your environment, so your confusion might very well result from the practice being different from the book. If management has taken over the daily standup and is using it to micro-manage the team, then indeed the daily standup has become micro-management. If you continue to run it in that way, then yes you are engaging in micro-management. But it shouldn't be called the daily standup anymore.
In addition to Sarov's excellent answer, there is also the purpose of the meeting.
The daily standup is not a management engagement. Neither the Scrum Master nor any other project or senior manager is doing any managing during the daily standup. I see this even stronger than Sarov does - not only is management not being reported to, there is also no flow from management towards the team. Nobody tells the team what to do or how to do it during the daily standup. There is no management activity going on during the daily standup and that is why it isn't micro-management - because it isn't management at all.
That doesn't mean this culture as-written is strictly put into practice in your environment, so your confusion might very well result from the practice being different from the book. If management has taken over the daily standup and is using it to micro-manage the team, then indeed the daily standup has become micro-management. If you continue to run it in that way, then yes you are engaging in micro-management. But it shouldn't be called the daily standup anymore.
answered yesterday
Tom
22112
22112
add a comment |
add a comment |
If you ask this question, or even if you have troubles answering it, you are likely a victim of dark scrum. A daily scrum meeting, done right, has no micro-management.
Terms have power, and dark scrum is one of these potentially important terms that I would like to see spread. Scrum was never made for this kind of micro-management, and its mis-use can have dire consequences for developers, projects and scrum itself (as a concept). If you can, consider using the term "dark scrum".
from the linked page(ronjeffries.com),
EDIT: I emphasize that below is a description of "dark scrum":
Every day, the team is supposed to get together and organize the day’s work. This practice, the “Daily Scrum”, is imposed on the typical team. There might be one person in the room, the ScrumMaster, who has been told how it should be done. The programmers haven’t been told. Quite often, even the Product Owner hasn’t been told. Almost certainly other power holders haven’t been told.
But the power holder already knows his job. His job is to stay on top of what everyone is doing, make sure they’re doing the right things, and redirect them if they’re not. How convenient that there’s a mandatory meeting where he can do that, every single day!
The result: instead of the team rallying around their joint mission and sorting out a good approach for the day, someone else drags information of of them, processes it in their head, and then tells everyone what to do. Since nothing ever goes quite as we expected yesterday morning, this improper activity often comes with a lot of blame-casting and tension.
Dark Scrum oppresses the team every day. Self-organization cannot emerge.
New contributor
3
Frankly, most engineers do not need to get together and organize the day’s work EVERY day. These are intelligent educated adults who can deal with getting organized on a weekly (or even monthly) basis. I don't see why this answers the question, but I +1'd you for the new term " dark scrum."
– Danny Schoemann
yesterday
3
@DannySchoemann, everyone certainly does not agree with the concept of SCRUM to begin with. You seem to have sound arguments against it. Personally I think the pros out-weigh the cons. regarding the frequency of stand-up meetings, I agree that every-day is not always necessary. Every second day or so seems to work better imho.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
2
@DannySchoemann most engineers don't want to get together and organize every day, but they really should. The closer they work together, the more effective they become as a team. If you can spend a week without communicating with your team, you're at risk of having way too big blocks of work being done without verification that you're still going in the right direction.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann if you're in constant contact with each other, then why you do say engineers do not need to get together to organize the day's work? It sounds more like you've moved beyond the need for a Daily Scrum than that having one is inherently not useful.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann, There may be something critical (for good or bad) that requires the groups attention. Maybe the database stored procedures are missing a feature that you cannot implement alone, maybe your expertise is urgently needed due to a new task. Maybe you are the only one who can spot this, but you do it only when you convene at the scrum meeting.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
|
show 8 more comments
If you ask this question, or even if you have troubles answering it, you are likely a victim of dark scrum. A daily scrum meeting, done right, has no micro-management.
Terms have power, and dark scrum is one of these potentially important terms that I would like to see spread. Scrum was never made for this kind of micro-management, and its mis-use can have dire consequences for developers, projects and scrum itself (as a concept). If you can, consider using the term "dark scrum".
from the linked page(ronjeffries.com),
EDIT: I emphasize that below is a description of "dark scrum":
Every day, the team is supposed to get together and organize the day’s work. This practice, the “Daily Scrum”, is imposed on the typical team. There might be one person in the room, the ScrumMaster, who has been told how it should be done. The programmers haven’t been told. Quite often, even the Product Owner hasn’t been told. Almost certainly other power holders haven’t been told.
But the power holder already knows his job. His job is to stay on top of what everyone is doing, make sure they’re doing the right things, and redirect them if they’re not. How convenient that there’s a mandatory meeting where he can do that, every single day!
The result: instead of the team rallying around their joint mission and sorting out a good approach for the day, someone else drags information of of them, processes it in their head, and then tells everyone what to do. Since nothing ever goes quite as we expected yesterday morning, this improper activity often comes with a lot of blame-casting and tension.
Dark Scrum oppresses the team every day. Self-organization cannot emerge.
New contributor
3
Frankly, most engineers do not need to get together and organize the day’s work EVERY day. These are intelligent educated adults who can deal with getting organized on a weekly (or even monthly) basis. I don't see why this answers the question, but I +1'd you for the new term " dark scrum."
– Danny Schoemann
yesterday
3
@DannySchoemann, everyone certainly does not agree with the concept of SCRUM to begin with. You seem to have sound arguments against it. Personally I think the pros out-weigh the cons. regarding the frequency of stand-up meetings, I agree that every-day is not always necessary. Every second day or so seems to work better imho.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
2
@DannySchoemann most engineers don't want to get together and organize every day, but they really should. The closer they work together, the more effective they become as a team. If you can spend a week without communicating with your team, you're at risk of having way too big blocks of work being done without verification that you're still going in the right direction.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann if you're in constant contact with each other, then why you do say engineers do not need to get together to organize the day's work? It sounds more like you've moved beyond the need for a Daily Scrum than that having one is inherently not useful.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann, There may be something critical (for good or bad) that requires the groups attention. Maybe the database stored procedures are missing a feature that you cannot implement alone, maybe your expertise is urgently needed due to a new task. Maybe you are the only one who can spot this, but you do it only when you convene at the scrum meeting.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
|
show 8 more comments
If you ask this question, or even if you have troubles answering it, you are likely a victim of dark scrum. A daily scrum meeting, done right, has no micro-management.
Terms have power, and dark scrum is one of these potentially important terms that I would like to see spread. Scrum was never made for this kind of micro-management, and its mis-use can have dire consequences for developers, projects and scrum itself (as a concept). If you can, consider using the term "dark scrum".
from the linked page(ronjeffries.com),
EDIT: I emphasize that below is a description of "dark scrum":
Every day, the team is supposed to get together and organize the day’s work. This practice, the “Daily Scrum”, is imposed on the typical team. There might be one person in the room, the ScrumMaster, who has been told how it should be done. The programmers haven’t been told. Quite often, even the Product Owner hasn’t been told. Almost certainly other power holders haven’t been told.
But the power holder already knows his job. His job is to stay on top of what everyone is doing, make sure they’re doing the right things, and redirect them if they’re not. How convenient that there’s a mandatory meeting where he can do that, every single day!
The result: instead of the team rallying around their joint mission and sorting out a good approach for the day, someone else drags information of of them, processes it in their head, and then tells everyone what to do. Since nothing ever goes quite as we expected yesterday morning, this improper activity often comes with a lot of blame-casting and tension.
Dark Scrum oppresses the team every day. Self-organization cannot emerge.
New contributor
If you ask this question, or even if you have troubles answering it, you are likely a victim of dark scrum. A daily scrum meeting, done right, has no micro-management.
Terms have power, and dark scrum is one of these potentially important terms that I would like to see spread. Scrum was never made for this kind of micro-management, and its mis-use can have dire consequences for developers, projects and scrum itself (as a concept). If you can, consider using the term "dark scrum".
from the linked page(ronjeffries.com),
EDIT: I emphasize that below is a description of "dark scrum":
Every day, the team is supposed to get together and organize the day’s work. This practice, the “Daily Scrum”, is imposed on the typical team. There might be one person in the room, the ScrumMaster, who has been told how it should be done. The programmers haven’t been told. Quite often, even the Product Owner hasn’t been told. Almost certainly other power holders haven’t been told.
But the power holder already knows his job. His job is to stay on top of what everyone is doing, make sure they’re doing the right things, and redirect them if they’re not. How convenient that there’s a mandatory meeting where he can do that, every single day!
The result: instead of the team rallying around their joint mission and sorting out a good approach for the day, someone else drags information of of them, processes it in their head, and then tells everyone what to do. Since nothing ever goes quite as we expected yesterday morning, this improper activity often comes with a lot of blame-casting and tension.
Dark Scrum oppresses the team every day. Self-organization cannot emerge.
New contributor
edited 21 hours ago
New contributor
answered yesterday
Stefan Karlsson
1712
1712
New contributor
New contributor
3
Frankly, most engineers do not need to get together and organize the day’s work EVERY day. These are intelligent educated adults who can deal with getting organized on a weekly (or even monthly) basis. I don't see why this answers the question, but I +1'd you for the new term " dark scrum."
– Danny Schoemann
yesterday
3
@DannySchoemann, everyone certainly does not agree with the concept of SCRUM to begin with. You seem to have sound arguments against it. Personally I think the pros out-weigh the cons. regarding the frequency of stand-up meetings, I agree that every-day is not always necessary. Every second day or so seems to work better imho.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
2
@DannySchoemann most engineers don't want to get together and organize every day, but they really should. The closer they work together, the more effective they become as a team. If you can spend a week without communicating with your team, you're at risk of having way too big blocks of work being done without verification that you're still going in the right direction.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann if you're in constant contact with each other, then why you do say engineers do not need to get together to organize the day's work? It sounds more like you've moved beyond the need for a Daily Scrum than that having one is inherently not useful.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann, There may be something critical (for good or bad) that requires the groups attention. Maybe the database stored procedures are missing a feature that you cannot implement alone, maybe your expertise is urgently needed due to a new task. Maybe you are the only one who can spot this, but you do it only when you convene at the scrum meeting.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
|
show 8 more comments
3
Frankly, most engineers do not need to get together and organize the day’s work EVERY day. These are intelligent educated adults who can deal with getting organized on a weekly (or even monthly) basis. I don't see why this answers the question, but I +1'd you for the new term " dark scrum."
– Danny Schoemann
yesterday
3
@DannySchoemann, everyone certainly does not agree with the concept of SCRUM to begin with. You seem to have sound arguments against it. Personally I think the pros out-weigh the cons. regarding the frequency of stand-up meetings, I agree that every-day is not always necessary. Every second day or so seems to work better imho.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
2
@DannySchoemann most engineers don't want to get together and organize every day, but they really should. The closer they work together, the more effective they become as a team. If you can spend a week without communicating with your team, you're at risk of having way too big blocks of work being done without verification that you're still going in the right direction.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann if you're in constant contact with each other, then why you do say engineers do not need to get together to organize the day's work? It sounds more like you've moved beyond the need for a Daily Scrum than that having one is inherently not useful.
– Erik
yesterday
1
@DannySchoemann, There may be something critical (for good or bad) that requires the groups attention. Maybe the database stored procedures are missing a feature that you cannot implement alone, maybe your expertise is urgently needed due to a new task. Maybe you are the only one who can spot this, but you do it only when you convene at the scrum meeting.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
3
3
Frankly, most engineers do not need to get together and organize the day’s work EVERY day. These are intelligent educated adults who can deal with getting organized on a weekly (or even monthly) basis. I don't see why this answers the question, but I +1'd you for the new term " dark scrum."
– Danny Schoemann
yesterday
Frankly, most engineers do not need to get together and organize the day’s work EVERY day. These are intelligent educated adults who can deal with getting organized on a weekly (or even monthly) basis. I don't see why this answers the question, but I +1'd you for the new term " dark scrum."
– Danny Schoemann
yesterday
3
3
@DannySchoemann, everyone certainly does not agree with the concept of SCRUM to begin with. You seem to have sound arguments against it. Personally I think the pros out-weigh the cons. regarding the frequency of stand-up meetings, I agree that every-day is not always necessary. Every second day or so seems to work better imho.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
@DannySchoemann, everyone certainly does not agree with the concept of SCRUM to begin with. You seem to have sound arguments against it. Personally I think the pros out-weigh the cons. regarding the frequency of stand-up meetings, I agree that every-day is not always necessary. Every second day or so seems to work better imho.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
2
2
@DannySchoemann most engineers don't want to get together and organize every day, but they really should. The closer they work together, the more effective they become as a team. If you can spend a week without communicating with your team, you're at risk of having way too big blocks of work being done without verification that you're still going in the right direction.
– Erik
yesterday
@DannySchoemann most engineers don't want to get together and organize every day, but they really should. The closer they work together, the more effective they become as a team. If you can spend a week without communicating with your team, you're at risk of having way too big blocks of work being done without verification that you're still going in the right direction.
– Erik
yesterday
1
1
@DannySchoemann if you're in constant contact with each other, then why you do say engineers do not need to get together to organize the day's work? It sounds more like you've moved beyond the need for a Daily Scrum than that having one is inherently not useful.
– Erik
yesterday
@DannySchoemann if you're in constant contact with each other, then why you do say engineers do not need to get together to organize the day's work? It sounds more like you've moved beyond the need for a Daily Scrum than that having one is inherently not useful.
– Erik
yesterday
1
1
@DannySchoemann, There may be something critical (for good or bad) that requires the groups attention. Maybe the database stored procedures are missing a feature that you cannot implement alone, maybe your expertise is urgently needed due to a new task. Maybe you are the only one who can spot this, but you do it only when you convene at the scrum meeting.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
@DannySchoemann, There may be something critical (for good or bad) that requires the groups attention. Maybe the database stored procedures are missing a feature that you cannot implement alone, maybe your expertise is urgently needed due to a new task. Maybe you are the only one who can spot this, but you do it only when you convene at the scrum meeting.
– Stefan Karlsson
yesterday
|
show 8 more comments
When the "stand-up" is properly orchestrated, it's a free exchange of ideas about each other's work. It's meant to enforce collaboration, not confrontation. Unless your manager is actively developing with you (they usually are) they should not be in the meeting.
Too many times have I worked on projects where people who worked across the isle from each other could have saved the other person 6 months' work.
New contributor
add a comment |
When the "stand-up" is properly orchestrated, it's a free exchange of ideas about each other's work. It's meant to enforce collaboration, not confrontation. Unless your manager is actively developing with you (they usually are) they should not be in the meeting.
Too many times have I worked on projects where people who worked across the isle from each other could have saved the other person 6 months' work.
New contributor
add a comment |
When the "stand-up" is properly orchestrated, it's a free exchange of ideas about each other's work. It's meant to enforce collaboration, not confrontation. Unless your manager is actively developing with you (they usually are) they should not be in the meeting.
Too many times have I worked on projects where people who worked across the isle from each other could have saved the other person 6 months' work.
New contributor
When the "stand-up" is properly orchestrated, it's a free exchange of ideas about each other's work. It's meant to enforce collaboration, not confrontation. Unless your manager is actively developing with you (they usually are) they should not be in the meeting.
Too many times have I worked on projects where people who worked across the isle from each other could have saved the other person 6 months' work.
New contributor
edited yesterday
Sarov
8,69421841
8,69421841
New contributor
answered yesterday
Eric Texley
211
211
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
The daily scrum is not to be considered micromanagement because it does not target any individual.
Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it.
Furthermore it is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing - so no feel of microm.
New contributor
5
Not sure I agree with your first two sentences. If the Big Boss(TM) is requesting status updates from the Team every day... that's still micro-management; s/he's just micro-managing the Team, rather than individuals.
– Sarov
yesterday
@sarov The big difference is that the information only flow one way, from the team to the manager. The manager is NOT supposed to use that information to take any specific action. Which is the big difference. If the manager use the information from each daily meeting to make management decisions that would be micro management.
– MTilsted
yesterday
4
If you don't do anything with information, then what's the point of having that information in the first place...?
– Sarov
yesterday
"[I]t is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing[.]" What is your source for this? It does not seem to align with anything in the Scrum Guide.
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
18 hours ago
"Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it." Even if the whole class is playing dodgeball, the small nerdy kid that's getting picked on feels more threatened than the class bully. It's still management even if you do it in a group setting.
– Zach Lipton
14 hours ago
add a comment |
The daily scrum is not to be considered micromanagement because it does not target any individual.
Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it.
Furthermore it is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing - so no feel of microm.
New contributor
5
Not sure I agree with your first two sentences. If the Big Boss(TM) is requesting status updates from the Team every day... that's still micro-management; s/he's just micro-managing the Team, rather than individuals.
– Sarov
yesterday
@sarov The big difference is that the information only flow one way, from the team to the manager. The manager is NOT supposed to use that information to take any specific action. Which is the big difference. If the manager use the information from each daily meeting to make management decisions that would be micro management.
– MTilsted
yesterday
4
If you don't do anything with information, then what's the point of having that information in the first place...?
– Sarov
yesterday
"[I]t is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing[.]" What is your source for this? It does not seem to align with anything in the Scrum Guide.
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
18 hours ago
"Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it." Even if the whole class is playing dodgeball, the small nerdy kid that's getting picked on feels more threatened than the class bully. It's still management even if you do it in a group setting.
– Zach Lipton
14 hours ago
add a comment |
The daily scrum is not to be considered micromanagement because it does not target any individual.
Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it.
Furthermore it is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing - so no feel of microm.
New contributor
The daily scrum is not to be considered micromanagement because it does not target any individual.
Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it.
Furthermore it is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing - so no feel of microm.
New contributor
New contributor
answered yesterday
Issy Forst
318
318
New contributor
New contributor
5
Not sure I agree with your first two sentences. If the Big Boss(TM) is requesting status updates from the Team every day... that's still micro-management; s/he's just micro-managing the Team, rather than individuals.
– Sarov
yesterday
@sarov The big difference is that the information only flow one way, from the team to the manager. The manager is NOT supposed to use that information to take any specific action. Which is the big difference. If the manager use the information from each daily meeting to make management decisions that would be micro management.
– MTilsted
yesterday
4
If you don't do anything with information, then what's the point of having that information in the first place...?
– Sarov
yesterday
"[I]t is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing[.]" What is your source for this? It does not seem to align with anything in the Scrum Guide.
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
18 hours ago
"Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it." Even if the whole class is playing dodgeball, the small nerdy kid that's getting picked on feels more threatened than the class bully. It's still management even if you do it in a group setting.
– Zach Lipton
14 hours ago
add a comment |
5
Not sure I agree with your first two sentences. If the Big Boss(TM) is requesting status updates from the Team every day... that's still micro-management; s/he's just micro-managing the Team, rather than individuals.
– Sarov
yesterday
@sarov The big difference is that the information only flow one way, from the team to the manager. The manager is NOT supposed to use that information to take any specific action. Which is the big difference. If the manager use the information from each daily meeting to make management decisions that would be micro management.
– MTilsted
yesterday
4
If you don't do anything with information, then what's the point of having that information in the first place...?
– Sarov
yesterday
"[I]t is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing[.]" What is your source for this? It does not seem to align with anything in the Scrum Guide.
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
18 hours ago
"Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it." Even if the whole class is playing dodgeball, the small nerdy kid that's getting picked on feels more threatened than the class bully. It's still management even if you do it in a group setting.
– Zach Lipton
14 hours ago
5
5
Not sure I agree with your first two sentences. If the Big Boss(TM) is requesting status updates from the Team every day... that's still micro-management; s/he's just micro-managing the Team, rather than individuals.
– Sarov
yesterday
Not sure I agree with your first two sentences. If the Big Boss(TM) is requesting status updates from the Team every day... that's still micro-management; s/he's just micro-managing the Team, rather than individuals.
– Sarov
yesterday
@sarov The big difference is that the information only flow one way, from the team to the manager. The manager is NOT supposed to use that information to take any specific action. Which is the big difference. If the manager use the information from each daily meeting to make management decisions that would be micro management.
– MTilsted
yesterday
@sarov The big difference is that the information only flow one way, from the team to the manager. The manager is NOT supposed to use that information to take any specific action. Which is the big difference. If the manager use the information from each daily meeting to make management decisions that would be micro management.
– MTilsted
yesterday
4
4
If you don't do anything with information, then what's the point of having that information in the first place...?
– Sarov
yesterday
If you don't do anything with information, then what's the point of having that information in the first place...?
– Sarov
yesterday
"[I]t is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing[.]" What is your source for this? It does not seem to align with anything in the Scrum Guide.
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
18 hours ago
"[I]t is more about getting more tasks to do then about reporting about yesterdays progressing[.]" What is your source for this? It does not seem to align with anything in the Scrum Guide.
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
18 hours ago
"Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it." Even if the whole class is playing dodgeball, the small nerdy kid that's getting picked on feels more threatened than the class bully. It's still management even if you do it in a group setting.
– Zach Lipton
14 hours ago
"Nobody feels threatened when everybody has to do it." Even if the whole class is playing dodgeball, the small nerdy kid that's getting picked on feels more threatened than the class bully. It's still management even if you do it in a group setting.
– Zach Lipton
14 hours ago
add a comment |
the dev team has in charge the burn-down chart as status update. In every case the PO have lot of contacts with the dev team during the sprint and he is always update from dev team in case of problem.
The Big Boss have to ask directly to the PO.
Stefano
New contributor
add a comment |
the dev team has in charge the burn-down chart as status update. In every case the PO have lot of contacts with the dev team during the sprint and he is always update from dev team in case of problem.
The Big Boss have to ask directly to the PO.
Stefano
New contributor
add a comment |
the dev team has in charge the burn-down chart as status update. In every case the PO have lot of contacts with the dev team during the sprint and he is always update from dev team in case of problem.
The Big Boss have to ask directly to the PO.
Stefano
New contributor
the dev team has in charge the burn-down chart as status update. In every case the PO have lot of contacts with the dev team during the sprint and he is always update from dev team in case of problem.
The Big Boss have to ask directly to the PO.
Stefano
New contributor
edited 15 hours ago
New contributor
answered 15 hours ago
Stefano Pedone
11
11
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Project Management Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fpm.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f25518%2fdaily-standup-vs-micro-management%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
11
The daily standup is a intra-team coordination meeting, not a status pull. pm.stackexchange.com/a/6657/4271
– Todd A. Jacobs♦
yesterday