2013Unpublished venueRequires access

ScrumBut, But Does it Matter? A Mixed-Method Study of the Planning Process of a Multi-team Scrum Organization

Ville Heikkilä, Maria Paasivaara, Casper Lassenius

Open publisher page 26 citations

Abstract

Context: Proponents of the Scrum software development method use the term "Scrum But" to refer to harmful changes to Scrum. Scrum has been increasingly adopted in large software development organizations. This has led to changes to Scrum practices, but it is not known if these changes are harmful. Objective: We studied how the requirements were planned and managed in the development teams of a large Scrum organization, how well the requirements planning and management practices matched Scrum, and whether the changes were perceived harmful. Method: We quantitatively analysed 435 requirements spanning a time period of approximately one year. We conducted a total of 40 interviews to study the Scrum adoption in the organization and to explain and validate the quantitative results. Results: The main discrepancies between the organization's practices and Scrum were the pacing of the planning process, which was more akin to a continuous process instead of the iteration-paced Scrum model, and the average time it took to develop requirements, which was considerably longer than the time prescribed by Scrum. The latter discrepancy was considered slightly harmful. Conclusion: Changes to the Scrum practices should be evaluated in their context to separate harmful ones from necessary or beneficial changes mandated by the organizational context.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Context: Proponents of the Scrum software development method use the term "Scrum But" to refer to harmful changes to Scrum. Scrum has been increasingly adopted in large software development organizations. This has led to changes to Scrum practices, but it is not known if these changes are harmful. Objective: We studied how the requirements were planned and managed in the development teams of a large Scrum organization, how well the requirements planning and management practices matched Scrum, and whether the changes were perceived harmful. Method: We quantitatively analysed 435 requirements spanning a time period of approximately one year. We conducted a total of 40 interviews to study the Scrum adoption in the organization and to explain and validate the quantitative results. Results: The main discrepancies between the organization's practices and Scrum were the pacing of the planning process, which was more akin to a continuous process instead of the iteration-paced Scrum model, and the average time it took to develop requirements, which was considerably longer than the time prescribed by Scrum. The latter discrepancy was considered slightly harmful. Conclusion: Changes to the Scrum practices should be evaluated in their context to separate harmful ones from necessary or beneficial changes mandated by the organizational context.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 26 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Context: Proponents of the Scrum software development method use the term "Scrum But" to refer to harmful changes to Scrum. Scrum has been increasingly adopted in large software development organizations. This has led to changes to Scrum practices, but it is not known if these changes are harmful. Objective: We studied how the requirements were planned and managed in the development teams of a large Scrum organization, how well the requirements planning and management practices matched Scrum, and whether the changes were perceived harmful. Method: We quantitatively analysed 435 requirements spanning a time period of approximately one year. We conducted a total of 40 interviews to study the Scrum adoption in the organization and to explain and validate the quantitative results. Results: The main discrepancies between the organization's practices and Scrum were the pacing of the planning process, which was more akin to a continuous process instead of the iteration-paced Scrum model, and the average time it took to develop requirements, which was considerably longer than the time prescribed by Scrum. The latter discrepancy was considered slightly harmful. Conclusion: Changes to the Scrum practices should be evaluated in their context to separate harmful ones from necessary or beneficial changes mandated by the organizational context.

Key concepts: Scrum, Context (archaeology), Process management, Process (computing), Computer science, Software development, Software, Knowledge management

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
ScrumBut, But Does it Matter? A Mixed-Method Study of the Planning Process of a Multi-team Scrum Organization — Research Paper | ScholarLens