Scrum Guide 2020 — I like it!. My First impression
By: Willem-Jan Ageling
Tags: Software Development, Serious Scrum, Scrum, Product Management, Agile

My General Thoughts

I will not beat around the bush: I like the new Scrum Guide.

I believe this is the biggest revision of the Scrum Guide ever. It will be impossible to discuss everything in this article. So I will focus on my top five observations.

1. Scrum is still Scrum

Yes, we are still looking at Scrum. It was always about empiricism and the new Scrum Guide is emphasising it even more than before.

Scrum still exists to create value for complex problems, using empiricism. Empiricism is Transparency — Inspection — Adaptation. The Sprint Planning, Daily Scrum, Sprint Review, and Sprint Retrospective Events still serve to inspect and adapt. The word ‘role’ has disappeared from the Scrum Guide. We now have ‘Accountabilities’ to remove confusion with job titles.

The core of Scrum is still the same.

2. Less Prescriptive

The Scrum Guide does not mention best practices or guidance for doing the events anymore. Instead, it focuses on explaining the purpose of the events (and other items). Examples are:

The three questions for the Daily Scrum are gone.

The Sprint Review section is greatly reduced in size, speaking about why it exists and what you should get out of it.

All the guidelines to assist in how to do the events were not applicable in all situations. They often were confusing. On top of that, there is a world of information about best practices. The Scrum Guide doesn’t have to do this:

“As Scrum is being used, patterns, processes, and insights that fit the Scrum framework as described in this document, may be found, applied and devised. Their description is beyond the purpose of the Scrum Guide because they are context sensitive and differ widely between Scrum uses. Such tactics for using within the Scrum framework vary widely and are described elsewhere.” — Scrum Guide 2020

I can only agree. The Scrum Guide is improved to focus on What Scrum is about, leaving the How to other sources. One of the great places to find this information is Serious Scrum. Another one is Scrum Patterns.

3. Commitment towards Product Goal, Sprint Goal and Definition of Done

The 2017 Scrum Guide already had concepts like Vision, Sprint Goal and Definition of Done. It already stated that Sprints were about defining and meeting a Sprint Goal and that Increments should meet the Definition of Done. Also, an Increment was a step towards a vision.

Most Scrum Teams knew that Increment needed to meet the Definition of Done. Fewer teams knew or understood the importance of the Sprint goal. The concept of vision was often no more than a vague notion.

This all has changed with the introduction of commitments:

The Product Goal

This is the long term objective of the product. A Product Backlog should reflect the Product Goal. Product Backlog Items that don’t help to meet the Product Goal should not be on the Product Backlog.

The Sprint Goal

This is the objective of the Sprint. Developers (formally known as the Development Team) commit to achieving the Sprint Goal. The Sprint Backlog has:

The Sprint Goal.

Product Backlog Items selected to meet the Sprint Goal.

A plan to meet the Sprint Goal.

The Definition of Done

This is the formal description of when an Increment meets quality requirements. Developers commit to creating Increments in accordance to the Definition of Done. Increments should be Done before they can be inspected at the Sprint Review.

The introduction of Commitments brings clarity and focus. Above all, the commitments help to foster empiricism as it raises the transparency, allowing for proper inspection of the artifacts. When Scrum Teams use them as intended, the Product Goal, Sprint Goal, and Definition of Done help to get everyone on the same page.

4. Scrum Values have more emphasis

Scrum Values

The Scrum Values Commitment, Focus, Openness, Respect, and Courage are still in the Scrum Guide. But Focus and Commitment have been put in the spotlight more. It may be a coincidence, but in the previous version of the Scrum Guide, the Scrum Values were presented in alphabetical order. Now it starts with Commitment and Focus. It is logical if you see how these two are all over the guide.

Commitment

The 2017 Scrum Guide used to say:

“People personally commit to achieving the goals of the Scrum Team.” — Scrum Guide 2017

This is a vague statement and many struggled with it or even ignored it. This changed with the way the new Scrum Guide introduces the commitments. Every artifact now comes with a commitment.

I am happy with this clarity. I wrote in another article that Scrum requires relentless commitment. In a complex environment, you need to commit to your goals to learn and adapt. Only then you can build valuable products. Without commitment, empiricism goes overboard and Scrum becomes worthless.

Focus

At several places in the Scrum Guide, focus is mentioned. As an example, a Scrum Team is “a cohesive unit of professionals focused on one objective at a time, the Product Goal.” — Scrum Guide 2020

Also, Commitments exist to bring focus. By having clear commitments for the Product Backlog, Sprint Backlog and the Increment, teams have a better sense of what they should focus on. This helps teams from going astray.

Balancing act

I foresee that the emphasis on commitment will be a topic of discussion for years to come. Commitment can be misunderstood and confused with ‘signed in blood’.

This is why I'm happy the Scrum Guide added sustainable pace. It balances things out. And it is a topic I missed dearly.

“Working in Sprints at a sustainable pace improves the Scrum Team’s focus and consistency.” — Scrum Guide 2020

At last, this Agile principle is part of Scrum. It is important to emphasise that teams shouldn’t work under too much pressure or working longer hours than they can handle. It is suitable for an Agile framework.

5. Scrum Roles … no longer exist

We no longer have Scrum Roles. They are renamed to Accountabilities. The reason is that roles were confused with job-titles. Renaming it to accountabilities is an attempt to move away from this. It also opens the door for shared accountability. As an example: multiple people could together fill the Scrum Master accountability. The Product Owner, however, remains to be one person.

The Development Team is gone. Only the Scrum Team remains, consisting of a Product Owner, Scrum Master and Developer. There’s no longer the notion of a team within a team. This is strengthened with the following:

“The Scrum Team is responsible for all product-related activities from stakeholder collaboration, verification, maintenance, operation, experimentation, research and development, and anything else that might be required.” — Scrum Guide 2020

The entire Scrum Team is responsible for the efforts to create high-value products. It is a team effort and everyone would be on board with that. No longer should Scrum be confused as a technology-focused feature factory.

My impression

I am very happy with this version of the Scrum Guide. I believe it makes total sense. It focuses on the why and tries to stay away from the how. It confirms Scrum is a framework where teams can choose which practices to apply in that framework.

It clarifies the importance of commitment and doesn’t forget sustainability.

Many things I wrote about previously are basically confirmed by the new Scrum Guide:

Scrum Teams should understand Product Goal.

The Sprint should be about achieving the Sprint Goal, not about completing items.

In a complex environment, Scrum Teams should be committed while using empiricism to creating high-value products.

Scrum Teams should be empowered and responsible for the entire value chain.

There’s so much more to tell about the new Scrum Guide and I can’t wait to discuss it. So you can expect in-depth articles about all kinds of facets soon!