How do you, as a ScrumMaster in a team, manage the HR aspects of your team?

[Dingshan Li]

Hi all,

Recently I discussed some questions with one friend from community (Hugo) about Scrum and like to involve more friends to join the discussion. I will post them one by one as well as the comments we had already. I also included Hugo in the rout.

@Hugo, if you like, you may join this group to know more friends.

Bellow is the first question with the comments.

How do you, as a ScrumMaster in a team, manage the HR aspects of your team? A Scrum team is also a team, which will face not only project things, but HR things, like performance, attitude, arbitration, etc.

[Dingshan Li]

This is a very common question about Scrum team in the organization, especially for appraisal strategy. There are also many discussions in the Agile community about it. Personally I think this question is not about Scrum team but a very common question for all kinds of team - how to keep the team to have high engagement and keep on delivering great result. It is about leadership what is a very important perspective for the whole organization, not just ScrumMaster, but more important for all managers/leaders in the organization. 

Particular about performance review, traditionally we will compare performance among the team members what will actually cause negative impact for most of the members. It is even worse when the decision is made by the direct manager's single opinion. In my organization, we use 360 feedback strategy to collect the different opinions about one member's performance. The candidates will be nominated by the member   being reviewed. It is not perfect but at least it will let people who will be reviewed to be involved to the whole process at the beginning.  Another change recently is that we stop to rank people what means we stopped to compare performance one to one. We will judge people's performance through people's achievements and competencies. Through this way, we encourage people to compare with themselves - are they better than last day? do they keep on trying to be great? We hope this may help people to focus their own growing. Then the whole team will grow based on each individual's growing. For a Scrum team, it is the same thing. Scrum provide equal opportunities to every team member in growing. For example, each one have choice to try different task, even those they are not familiar with. So everyone may receive more chances to learn new things. What kind of performance that everyone need to care is about if they become better and better.

[Dingshan Li]

Hugo's feedback:

Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.

360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)

A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?

I don't have good answers for the above questions. 

In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team. Correction, not tell, but convince. 

Unfortunately, rugby is not popular in China.

Do you have the same feeling?

[Brian Fu]

My first question is, if the reviewee pick the people who's going to review him, do you there might be any bias since I believe everyone will chose his buddies. We did sort of 360, but let everyone relevant to be involved, like PO, SM, peer, customer, etc.

Second question, I was agreeing with your view regarding not rank and not compare with others. But I found out:

• People are not always be able to improve. Something might came from born.
• It's popular to do forced ranking, the 20-70-10 like GE. Without ranking, how do you decide who can get more pay or bonus?

发件人： Dingshan Li <lidin...@gmail.com>
收件人： agileto...@googlegroups.com; Yue PEI <hugo...@live.com>
发送日期： 2012年2月3日, 星期五, 上午 10:52
主题: Re: How do you, as a ScrumMaster in a team, manage the HR aspects of your team?

This is a very common question about Scrum team in the organization, especially for appraisal strategy. There are also many discussions in the Agile community about it. Personally I think this question is not about Scrum team but a very common question for all kinds of team - how to keep the team to have high engagement and keep on delivering great result. It is about leadership what is a very important perspective for the whole organization, not just ScrumMaster, but more important for all managers/leaders in the organization. 

Particular about performance review, traditionally we will compare performance among the team members what will actually cause negative impact for most of the members. It is even worse when the decision is made by the direct manager's single opinion. In my organization, we use 360 feedback strategy to collect the different opinions about one member's performance. The candidates will be nominated by the member   being reviewed. It is not perfect but at least it will let people who will be reviewed to be involved to the whole process at the beginning.  Another change recently is that we stop to rank people what means we stopped to compare performance one to one. We will judge people's performance through people's achievements and competencies. Through this way, we encourage people to compare with themselves - are they better than last day? do they keep on trying to be great? We hope this may help people to focus their own growing. Then the whole team will grow based on each individual's growing. For a Scrum team, it is the same thing. Scrum provide equal opportunities to every team member in growing. For example, each one have choice to try different task, even those they are not familiar with. So everyone may receive more chances to learn new things. What kind of performance that everyone need to care is about if they become better and better.

--
您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的“AgileTourChina”论坛。
要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。
若有更多问题，请通过 http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN 访问此网上论坛。

[Daniel Teng]

Hi 

First of all, I think the question being asked tells us a lot. Why ScrumMaster needs to manage HR aspect of the team? Will a servant do performance appraisal for his boss?

2012/2/3 Dingshan Li <lidin...@gmail.com>

Hugo's feedback:

Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.

360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)

Why do we always link such assessment to bonus and bonus? I guess this IS the MAIN PURPOSE of traditional assessment.

A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?

I don't have good answers for the above questions. 

A good ScrumMaster will never do that. 

 

In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team. Correction, not tell, but convince. 

There are some rules, such as team has to be cross-functional, work has to be done done by the end of sprint, inspect and adapt, time box < 4 weeks etc.  

Unfortunately, rugby is not popular in China.

Do you have the same feeling?

--

您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的“AgileTourChina”论坛。
要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。
若有更多问题，请通过 http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN 访问此网上论坛。

--
Best Regards
Daniel Teng, Certified Scrum Coach

http://www.danielteng.com/

[Shining Hsiong]

为啥这种讨论要用英文进行？看着有点费劲，而且感觉谈的不透彻。

我觉得从组织管理层面谈敏捷，即便是Scrum Team，也是要借鉴MBA传统管理框架的的。比如KPI，比如组织层级，汇报体系等等，还有基于这样的管理框架的一些管理方法。

其实我很想知道，那些有这两种框架知识的人，如何将两者的精髓提炼、并整合在一起？或者至少做一下对比分析（印象中看过这类文章，但是找不到了）。

2012/2/3 Daniel Teng <tengz...@gmail.com>

--

--

Shining Hsiong

I am Shining. Always!

Blog: http://iamshining.com/

Weibo, Twitter, LinkedIn, Skype: @shiningxyy

[Jeff Xiong]

> 我觉得从组织管理层面谈敏捷，即便是Scrum
> Team，也是要借鉴MBA传统管理框架的的。比如KPI，比如组织层级，汇报体系等等，还有基于这样的管理框架的一些管理方法。

为什么？

恰好一两个月以前HBR发表了一个文章，关于Morning Star的访谈，标题叫“First, Let's Fire All The Managers”

http://hbr.org/2011/12/first-lets-fire-all-the-managers/ar/1

很好奇你这个“觉得”是基于什么得出的。

--
Jeff Xiong
www.Gigix.me

[Leon Shi]

呵呵，一直潜水，第一次发言，纯粹观点探讨，表拍砖！

先表明我的观点：追求理想同时尊重现实，不走极端，借鉴各种方法学，结合起来探索更加多快好省的项目、团队管理方式方法，适合你的现状的就是好的，不适合就大家一起想办法持续改进！
简言之：manager还是要的，不过要换个思路、风格！

所以对于Shining Hsiong与Jeff Xiong的观点，我是各部分赞同，我的观点：
1、Scrum提倡manager不干预，只是提倡而已，其实现实层面做不到，至少不能100%做到，有些是因为manager个人素质问题（往好了说是风格问题），有些的确是现实需要，任何一个商业项目都需要有人负责，不可能没有manager的介入，Scrum是鼓励团队自治、自我激励，但现实组员本身也有疑问，任何事情没有监管（注意我是说监管而不是控制）是不行的，因为林子大了什么鸟都有，用人不疑也不是说撒手不管；
2、仔细看下面HBR的文章，其实作者最后是承认了manager对于组织的必要性，因为纯粹的市场（可以引喻为一堆堆的scrum teams），在大规模协同的背景下，是无序的，并不能体现理想模型中市场的效率，需要必要的组织结构去协调，甚至必要情况下控制之；
3、但是另一方面，在软件行业充分发展的今天，特别是Agile/Scrum/XP流行多年后的背景下，管理方式、风格必须要改革，过往方法如KPI、daily/weekly report等重控制型方法肯定行不通了，一方面是manager已经对经验越来越丰富的工程师们，或复杂度越来越高的项目提不出或难以提出具体指导，另一方面在信息爆炸、追求个人自由的社会背景下，有良好教育背景的工程师们也不像原来刚出校门那样了，越来越不服管了！
4、我欣赏一句话，忘了是哪里看到的，说“管理一堆程序员就像带领一群骄傲的猫”，管理者自身要意识到大部分（如果不是全部的话）的工作是需要工程师们去完成、创新的，为了更好的productivity故，你得要充分尊重他们的决定，甚至要鼓励他们自己做决定，首先要自我定位准确了，你要做的是保持沟通顺畅（比如说向外、向上）；
5、回到Scrum，在大的研发机构里，分工很细，各个项目组之间其实有很多关联，或强或弱，大部分情况下纯粹的Scrum Master是比较难做的，很容易与manager们重叠，所以出现manager直接兼任Scrum Master的情况是很常见的，不过如果有很强势、经验丰富或者技术牛叉、同时又灵活的人愿意充当Scrum Master，自然最好也不过了，这点上我的观点是每个项目的角色定位都要看具体情况，不能一个模式照搬，具体的人很重要；

呵呵，越写越乱，不成章法，仅供参考！

Thanks,
-Leon

[Jeff Xiong]

你想多了。我还没有说我有什么观点。我的问题是，熊妍妍的“觉得”是基于什么得出的。我引用HBR那篇文章，是为了指出两个事实：（1）那篇文章的观点与熊妍妍的非常不同；（2）那篇文章基于一家真实的企业20年的运营实例。那么如果没有一个更有力的基础，我觉得这个“觉得”就不是太有说服力。

说白了，我对于各种想法啦感觉啦兴趣不大。我更有兴趣了解这些想法背后的支撑（或者没有支撑）。

2012/2/4 Leon Shi <leon...@autodesk.com>:

--
Jeff Xiong
www.Gigix.me

[Xu Yi]

晨星这个我在微博上也发过一次：http://weibo.com/1408827293/y2S2t7UlQ

不过作者哈默尔也说了，不是每个企业都可以复制晨星的做法，晨星的做法也远没有到完美的程度。所以，对自己企业来说，还是该干嘛干嘛吧。

至于Scrum Master和什么HR事务，答案非常简单啊“don't do it”。Scrum Master又不是manager，干这些事情干嘛？这些事情有Line Manager（同义词包括：People Manager、Department Manager等）去照顾、处理就行了。

//徐毅

- - - - - - - - - -
Xu Yi, Kaverjody
Senior Agile Consultant @ HP Enterprise Services
Blog : http://blog.sina.com.cn/kaverjody
Sina Weibo : http://weibo.com/kaverjody
Skype : kaverjody
- - - - - - - - - -

[Jeff Xiong]

我赞同徐毅这个。说到底，Scrum是软件开发方法。做业务就好好做业务，有好的企业环境支撑就感激，没有好的企业环境支撑就该跑路跑路该硬扛硬扛。你不可能在企业环境不支持的情况下非要说我就要靠Scrum把这个团队变成晨星。这不是在粉Scrum，这是纯黑。

2012/2/4 Xu Yi <kave...@gmail.com>:

[Shining Hsiong]

好吧，既然熊节开腔了，我也说说我的观点吧！

组织里有不少人，尤其是那些自以为是的人，经常因为自己拥有某种可以制定和推行标准的权威，而希望通过一种机制让其他人服从于这种权威。这样的人，在一些有工程师主导的企业或团队里，相对来说，要表现的不那么明显。因为这些懂技术的人“不好管”，越聪明的人越难“惹”。

而我为什么说在组织管理层面谈敏捷，就不得不还要谈“管理”呢？是因为敏捷实践大多数是在工程师团队里，而组织里还有大量的非工程师团队，比如人事、销售、市场、财务、还有总经办、董事会。这些体系的人，你让他们接受“无管理”、“自管理”、“无序”、“无计划”、“无文档”，是费劲的事。

消除管理、KPI无用、层级管理害人，其中的很多观点，其实我都是追崇的。我说的在组织层面要借鉴传统的管理体系的东西，是指在革命成本过高或时机不成熟的情况下，一种在平衡中的适度变革。

说白了，Scrum Team只是一个圈子，圈子内部一套玩法，圈子外部，也就是组织层面的，让他们接受你的玩法，那么你得先按照他们的玩法玩一阵。其实跟Leon的观点也差不多。不知道这是不是Xiong Jie想听到的。

另一个话题，请教一下：大家伙都在读HBR吗？现在整个管理研究界的评论趋势是怎样？

2012/2/4 Jeff Xiong <gigi...@gmail.com>

--

[Daniel Teng]

Hi

Daniel Teng

www.danielteng.com

在 2012-2-4，下午3:41，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com> 写道：

But who is servant? Who is boss?

Short answer, team is boss, SM is servant. 

HR stuff is like project stuff, which must be undertaken by some one. 

But Scrum is silent on that, which is on purpose. Then someone can take care.

On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:14 PM, Daniel Teng wrote:

Hi 

First of all, I think the question being asked tells us a lot. Why ScrumMaster needs to manage HR aspect of the team? Will a servant do performance appraisal for his boss?

2012/2/3 Dingshan Li <lidin...@gmail.com>

Hugo's feedback:

Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.

360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)

Why do we always link such assessment to bonus and bonus? I guess this IS the MAIN PURPOSE of traditional assessment.

[Hugo] No. We don't link assessment to bonus, but on the contrary, we link bonus to assessment. Of course, we can cut this kind of link to make bonus isolated. But will that be a better way? Or is there a perfect way to give out bonus, instead of linking it to employee's performance, contributions and progress?

I want ask one question, what's the BONUS for?

A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?

I don't have good answers for the above questions. 

A good ScrumMaster will never do that. 

[Hugo] f you could tell me what a good ScrumMaster will do, I'll appreciate.

Google Michael James scrummaster example checklist 

 

In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team. Correction, not tell, but convince. 

There are some rules, such as team has to be cross-functional, work has to be done done by the end of sprint, inspect and adapt, time box < 4 weeks etc.  

[Hugo] Yes, there are rules, but not prerequisites. Maybe I'm wrong, nut I persist that we'd better make clear prerequisites prior to applying Scrum in your team.

What do you mean by prerequisites? The pre-conditions for new teams before adoption? If that is what it means, then answer is NO. Even If the pre-condition was really bad, good team will listen to the feedback of sprint and keep improving for ever. Bad team will attribute that to something like scrum. I tried Scrum, but it didn't work for me. The real reason is the bad team never fix the problem exposed by scrum and use the universal DEFAULT solution - ignore it and accuse something else.

[Daniel Teng]

Hi

Daniel Teng

www.danielteng.com

在 2012-2-4，下午4:37，Shining Hsiong <shini...@gmail.com> 写道：

为啥这种讨论要用英文进行？看着有点费劲，而且感觉谈的不透彻。

用邮件讨论本来就很累，而且不透彻。

我觉得从组织管理层面谈敏捷，即便是Scrum Team，也是要借鉴MBA传统管理框架的的。比如KPI，比如组织层级，汇报体系等等，还有基于这样的管理框架的一些管理方法。

Scrum从来没有说Scrum团队不应该借鉴这些。

他只是说如果问题很大，应该把问题切小，人太多有问题，应该用小团队，而且这个团队应该能够独立解决每个小问题，团队应该每隔一定时间发布，不应该超过四周，团队要不停反思，提高。

[Daniel Teng]

Hi

Daniel Teng
www.danielteng.com

在 2012-2-4，下午7:47，Leon Shi <leon...@autodesk.com> 写道：

> 呵呵，一直潜水，第一次发言，纯粹观点探讨，表拍砖！
>
> 先表明我的观点：追求理想同时尊重现实，不走极端，借鉴各种方法学，结合起来探索更加多快好省的项目、团队管理方式方法，适合你的现状的就是好的，不适合就大家一起想办法持续改进！
> 简言之：manager还是要的，不过要换个思路、风格！

或者说现在manager做的很多事情还是要的。

>
> 所以对于Shining Hsiong与Jeff Xiong的观点，我是各部分赞同，我的观点：
> 1、Scrum提倡manager不干预，只是提倡而已，其实现实层面做不到，至少不能100%做到，有些是因为manager个人素质问题（往好了说是风格问题），有些的确是现实需要，任何一个商业项目都需要有人负责，不可能没有manager的介入，Scrum是鼓励团队自治、自我激励，但现实组员本身也有疑问，任何事情没有监管（注意我是说监管而不是控制）是不行的，因为林子大了什么鸟都有，用人不疑也不是说撒手不管；

但是最多两个sprint就知道团队不出活，出问题了，这不是很强的监管么？

> 2、仔细看下面HBR的文章，其实作者最后是承认了manager对于组织的必要性，因为纯粹的市场（可以引喻为一堆堆的scrum teams），在大规模协同的背景下，是无序的，并不能体现理想模型中市场的效率，需要必要的组织结构去协调，甚至必要情况下控制之；
> 3、但是另一方面，在软件行业充分发展的今天，特别是Agile/Scrum/XP流行多年后的背景下，管理方式、风格必须要改革，过往方法如KPI、daily/weekly report等重控制型方法肯定行不通了，一方面是manager已经对经验越来越丰富的工程师们，或复杂度越来越高的项目提不出或难以提出具体指导，另一方面在信息爆炸、追求个人自由的社会背景下，有良好教育背景的工程师们也不像原来刚出校门那样了，越来越不服管了！
> 4、我欣赏一句话，忘了是哪里看到的，说“管理一堆程序员就像带领一群骄傲的猫”，管理者自身要意识到大部分（如果不是全部的话）的工作是需要工程师们去完成、创新的，为了更好的productivity故，你得要充分尊重他们的决定，甚至要鼓励他们自己做决定，首先要自我定位准确了，你要做的是保持沟通顺畅（比如说向外、向上）；

其实向外，向上才是管理者应该关心的，也是很多manager因为太过于向下而没有时间关注的。

> 5、回到Scrum，在大的研发机构里，分工很细，各个项目组之间其实有很多关联，或强或弱，大部分情况下纯粹的Scrum Master是比较难做的，很容易与manager们重叠，所以出现manager直接兼任Scrum Master的情况是很常见的，不过如果有很强势、经验丰富或者技术牛叉、同时又灵活的人愿意充当Scrum Master，自然最好也不过了，这点上我的观点是每个项目的角色定位都要看具体情况，不能一个模式照搬，具体的人很重要；

这些牛人做scrummaster反而比较危险。

[Daniel Teng]

Hi Hugo

2012/2/4 Highboys <hugo...@live.com>

Thanks so much! But I still have some questions.

发自我的 iPhone

在 2012-2-4，21:56，Daniel Teng <tengz...@gmail.com> 写道：

Hi

Daniel Teng

www.danielteng.com

在 2012-2-4，下午3:41，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com> 写道：

But who is servant? Who is boss?

Short answer, team is boss, SM is servant. 

[Hugo] So do you mean SM, a servant, works as a coach before his boss?

Why not? He should ask a lot of challenging questions to his boss. 

HR stuff is like project stuff, which must be undertaken by some one. 

But Scrum is silent on that, which is on purpose. Then someone can take care.

[Hugo] In fact, HR things consist of many items, such as moral, attitude, goodwill, etc. If one team member is a little passive, who will handle it? The team? SM? Or someone outside the team? 

Whose problem is it? Then the WHO takes care of it. It is very dangerous to solve problem for someone else. It is more dangerous if the someone never think it a problem.

On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:14 PM, Daniel Teng wrote:

Hi 

First of all, I think the question being asked tells us a lot. Why ScrumMaster needs to manage HR aspect of the team? Will a servant do performance appraisal for his boss?

2012/2/3 Dingshan Li <lidin...@gmail.com>

Hugo's feedback:

Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.

360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)

Why do we always link such assessment to bonus and bonus? I guess this IS the MAIN PURPOSE of traditional assessment.

[Hugo] No. We don't link assessment to bonus, but on the contrary, we link bonus to assessment. Of course, we can cut this kind of link to make bonus isolated. But will that be a better way? Or is there a perfect way to give out bonus, instead of linking it to employee's performance, contributions and progress?

I want ask one question, what's the BONUS for?

[Hugo] Bonus is a kind of award to appreciate one employee's contribution, to value his performance and to recognize his progress. 

You can take a look at http://www.alfiekohn.org/books/pbr.htm and http://www.danpink.com/drive 

A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?

I don't have good answers for the above questions. 

A good ScrumMaster will never do that. 

[Hugo] f you could tell me what a good ScrumMaster will do, I'll appreciate.

Google Michael James scrummaster example checklist 

[Hugo] Thanks!

 

In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team. Correction, not tell, but convince. 

There are some rules, such as team has to be cross-functional, work has to be done done by the end of sprint, inspect and adapt, time box < 4 weeks etc.  

[Hugo] Yes, there are rules, but not prerequisites. Maybe I'm wrong, nut I persist that we'd better make clear prerequisites prior to applying Scrum in your team.

What do you mean by prerequisites? The pre-conditions for new teams before adoption? If that is what it means, then answer is NO. Even If the pre-condition was really bad, good team will listen to the feedback of sprint and keep improving for ever. Bad team will attribute that to something like scrum. I tried Scrum, but it didn't work for me. The real reason is the bad team never fix the problem exposed by scrum and use the universal DEFAULT solution - ignore it and accuse something else.

[Hugo] Ken Schwaber said the same thing years before, but it is not convincing. 

Scrum is not a religion. If it has weakness, it has weakness. 

The more important thing is 1) we try to figure out the weakness and then solve it, 2) we try figure out the weakness and then warn others before solving it. That is the prerequisite. It is better than just letting the team take the blame.

Change ppl is very difficult. Many will have to learn from mistake. Without making mistake, they will never really learn it. The Scrum rules (actually if you take a look at "the new new product development game" HBR article, those were from there) are very simple, but very few teams really get it.

Unfortunately, rugby is not popular in China.

Do you have the same feeling?

--
您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的“AgileTourChina”论坛。
要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。
若有更多问题，请通过 http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN 访问此网上论坛。

--
Best Regards
Daniel Teng, Certified Scrum Coach

http://www.danielteng.com/

[越 裴]

But who is servant? Who is boss?

HR stuff is like project stuff, which must be undertaken by some one. 

On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:14 PM, Daniel Teng wrote:

Hi 

First of all, I think the question being asked tells us a lot. Why ScrumMaster needs to manage HR aspect of the team? Will a servant do performance appraisal for his boss?

2012/2/3 Dingshan Li <lidin...@gmail.com>

Hugo's feedback:

Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.

360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)

Why do we always link such assessment to bonus and bonus? I guess this IS the MAIN PURPOSE of traditional assessment.

[Hugo] No. We don't link assessment to bonus, but on the contrary, we link bonus to assessment. Of course, we can cut this kind of link to make bonus isolated. But will that be a better way? Or is there a perfect way to give out bonus, instead of linking it to employee's performance, contributions and progress?

A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?

I don't have good answers for the above questions. 

A good ScrumMaster will never do that. 

[Hugo] f you could tell me what a good ScrumMaster will do, I'll appreciate.

 

In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team. Correction, not tell, but convince. 

There are some rules, such as team has to be cross-functional, work has to be done done by the end of sprint, inspect and adapt, time box < 4 weeks etc.  

[Hugo] Yes, there are rules, but not prerequisites. Maybe I'm wrong, nut I persist that we'd better make clear prerequisites prior to applying Scrum in your team.

Unfortunately, rugby is not popular in China.

Do you have the same feeling?

--
您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的“AgileTourChina”论坛。
要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。
若有更多问题，请通过 http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN 访问此网上论坛。

[Highboys]

Thanks so much! But I still have some questions.

发自我的 iPhone

在 2012-2-4，21:56，Daniel Teng <tengz...@gmail.com> 写道：

Hi

Daniel Teng

www.danielteng.com

在 2012-2-4，下午3:41，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com> 写道：

But who is servant? Who is boss?

Short answer, team is boss, SM is servant. 

[Hugo] So do you mean SM, a servant, works as a coach before his boss?

HR stuff is like project stuff, which must be undertaken by some one. 

But Scrum is silent on that, which is on purpose. Then someone can take care.

[Hugo] In fact, HR things consist of many items, such as moral, attitude, goodwill, etc. If one team member is a little passive, who will handle it? The team? SM? Or someone outside the team? 

On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:14 PM, Daniel Teng wrote:

Hi 

First of all, I think the question being asked tells us a lot. Why ScrumMaster needs to manage HR aspect of the team? Will a servant do performance appraisal for his boss?

2012/2/3 Dingshan Li <lidin...@gmail.com>

Hugo's feedback:

Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.

360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)

Why do we always link such assessment to bonus and bonus? I guess this IS the MAIN PURPOSE of traditional assessment.

[Hugo] No. We don't link assessment to bonus, but on the contrary, we link bonus to assessment. Of course, we can cut this kind of link to make bonus isolated. But will that be a better way? Or is there a perfect way to give out bonus, instead of linking it to employee's performance, contributions and progress?

I want ask one question, what's the BONUS for?

[Hugo] Bonus is a kind of award to appreciate one employee's contribution, to value his performance and to recognize his progress. 

A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?

I don't have good answers for the above questions. 

A good ScrumMaster will never do that. 

[Hugo] f you could tell me what a good ScrumMaster will do, I'll appreciate.

Google Michael James scrummaster example checklist 

[Hugo] Thanks!

 

In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team. Correction, not tell, but convince. 

There are some rules, such as team has to be cross-functional, work has to be done done by the end of sprint, inspect and adapt, time box < 4 weeks etc.  

[Hugo] Yes, there are rules, but not prerequisites. Maybe I'm wrong, nut I persist that we'd better make clear prerequisites prior to applying Scrum in your team.

What do you mean by prerequisites? The pre-conditions for new teams before adoption? If that is what it means, then answer is NO. Even If the pre-condition was really bad, good team will listen to the feedback of sprint and keep improving for ever. Bad team will attribute that to something like scrum. I tried Scrum, but it didn't work for me. The real reason is the bad team never fix the problem exposed by scrum and use the universal DEFAULT solution - ignore it and accuse something else.

[Hugo] Ken Schwaber said the same thing years before, but it is not convincing. 

Scrum is not a religion. If it has weakness, it has weakness. 

The more important thing is 1) we try to figure out the weakness and then solve it, 2) we try figure out the weakness and then warn others before solving it. That is the prerequisite. It is better than just letting the team take the blame.

Unfortunately, rugby is not popular in China.

Do you have the same feeling?

--
您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的“AgileTourChina”论坛。
要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。
若有更多问题，请通过 http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN 访问此网上论坛。

[Hugo]

On Feb 3, 12:28 pm, Brian Fu <brian_b...@yahoo.com.cn> wrote:
> My first question is, if the reviewee pick the people who's going to review him, do you there might be any bias since I believe everyone will chose his buddies. We did sort of 360, but let everyone relevant to be involved, like PO, SM, peer, customer, etc.

[Hugo] Involving all relevant people is not a smart idea. This will
bring you few benefit, but lots of costs. Assessment should be based
on facts, but how can you expect that others remember all facts, if
they didn't intend to do it originally? (But if a manager intends to
do it from the very beginning, it's easy for him. He just needs to
take notes in time.)

>
> Second question, I was agreeing with your view regarding not rank and not compare with others. But I found out:

>         * People are not always be able to improve. Something might came from born.
>         * It's popular to do forced ranking, the 20-70-10 like GE. Without ranking, how do you decide who can get more pay or bonus?
[Hugo] What you found is true. I disagree with "no ranking" and "no
comparing with others". By comparison with others, you can learn from
them, especially those better than you.

> 发件人： Dingshan Li <lidings...@gmail.com>
> 收件人： agileto...@googlegroups.com; Yue PEI <hugop...@live.com>

[越 裴]

有趣的文章，老套的观点。作者还可以再往前走一步，就是管理无政府主义了。😊 （其实目前敏捷已经左顾右盼地走上了这条不归路了。）
可惜的是历史上为数不多的几次无政府主义试验，最后都歇菜了，只留下了反对者的冷嘲热讽和旁观者的唏嘘感叹。
没有manager的世界，基本上就是一个没有老师的幼儿园，自由啊，活力啊，揪女生辫子啊，往鞋窠里尿尿啊，各种调皮捣蛋啊。作为一个成年人和父亲，我保留“小树要砍，小孩要管”的观点。

Manager的本职工作，最重要的就是Lead、Organize和Supervise，这也是Scrum的说明书里最含混不清的部分。
我们不能期望每个人都象方舟子一样有信仰、有热情、然后一根筋，有时候我们还真需要有人来组织、来引导、来监督。

Scrum的管理无政府主义，需要有特色的中国土壤的检验，不能光找老外代笔。

~Hugo

[Hugo]

But who is servant? Who is boss?

HR stuff is like project stuff, which must be undertaken by some one.

On Feb 3, 11:14 pm, Daniel Teng <tengzhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> First of all, I think the question being asked tells us a lot. Why
> ScrumMaster needs to manage HR aspect of the team? Will a servant do
> performance appraisal for his boss?
>

> 2012/2/3 Dingshan Li <lidings...@gmail.com>

>
> > Hugo's feedback:
>
> > Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially
> > different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility
> > of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.
>
> > 360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the
> > efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems
> > to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if
> > this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes
> > a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)
>
> Why do we always link such assessment to bonus and bonus? I guess this IS
> the MAIN PURPOSE of traditional assessment.

[Hugo] No. We don't link assessment to bonus, but on the contrary, we
link bonus to assessment. Of course, we can cut this kind of link to
make bonus isolated. But will that be a better way? Or is there a
perfect way to give out bonus, instead of linking it to employee's
performance, contributions and progress?

>

> A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members
>
> > improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team
> > members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants
> > to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What
> > if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?
> > I don't have good answers for the above questions.
>
> A good ScrumMaster will never do that.

[Hugo] f you could tell me what a good ScrumMaster will do, I'll
appreciate.

>
>
>

> > In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every
> > team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm
> > not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the
> > world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or
> > ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a
> > rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs
> > some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have
> > to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team.
> > Correction, not tell, but convince.
>
> There are some rules, such as team has to be cross-functional, work has to
> be done done by the end of sprint, inspect and adapt, time box < 4 weeks
> etc.

[Hugo] Yes, there are rules, but not prerequisites. Maybe I'm wrong,
nut I persist that we'd better make clear prerequisites prior to
applying Scrum in your team.

>
>
>

> > Unfortunately, rugby is not popular in China.
>
> > Do you have the same feeling?
>
> > --
> > 您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的"AgileTourChina"论坛。
> > 要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
> > 要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。
> > 若有更多问题，请通过http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN访问此网上论坛。
>
> --
> Best Regards

> Daniel Teng, Certified Scrum Coachhttp://www.danielteng.com/<http://www.cnblogs.com/tengzy>

[Tony]

我提议开个视频会议，可协助会议资源。

这沟通效果太差。

或者今年敏捷中国或敏捷之旅，包个咖啡馆，安排一个晚间的坐与论道。

好吧?Daniel.

在 2012-2-4，16:01，Hugo <hugo...@live.com> 写到：

[Daniel Teng]

对于大多数人来说，论道是没有用的。

Daniel

2012/2/5 Tony <taol...@gmail.com>

[Hugo PEI]

Thanks!

发自我的 iPad

在 2012-2-4，23:37，Daniel Teng <tengz...@gmail.com> 写道：

Hi Hugo

2012/2/4 Highboys <hugo...@live.com>

Thanks so much! But I still have some questions.

发自我的 iPhone

在 2012-2-4，21:56，Daniel Teng <tengz...@gmail.com> 写道：

Hi

Daniel Teng

www.danielteng.com

在 2012-2-4，下午3:41，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com> 写道：

But who is servant? Who is boss?

Short answer, team is boss, SM is servant. 

[Hugo] So do you mean SM, a servant, works as a coach before his boss?

Why not? He should ask a lot of challenging questions to his boss. 

But that's not a servant, that's a consultant. Anyway, I got your point.

HR stuff is like project stuff, which must be undertaken by some one. 

But Scrum is silent on that, which is on purpose. Then someone can take care.

[Hugo] In fact, HR things consist of many items, such as moral, attitude, goodwill, etc. If one team member is a little passive, who will handle it? The team? SM? Or someone outside the team? 

Whose problem is it? Then the WHO takes care of it. It is very dangerous to solve problem for someone else. It is more dangerous if the someone never think it a problem.

Whose problem is it? Then the WHO takes care of it. 

It's also dangerous. If you got sick, the better way is to go to hospital. The doctor can help heal the sickness.

My problem is there are times when one team member doesn't realize he is sick, so someone else has to tell him. So who is the observer? Who is the doctor?

On Feb 3, 2012, at 11:14 PM, Daniel Teng wrote:

Hi 

First of all, I think the question being asked tells us a lot. Why ScrumMaster needs to manage HR aspect of the team? Will a servant do performance appraisal for his boss?

2012/2/3 Dingshan Li <lidin...@gmail.com>

Hugo's feedback:

Because a Scrum team is alleged to be self-organized, it's essentially different from a normal team. And as we know, the role and responsibility of ScrumMaster are different from those of a common team leader.

360-degree assessment is not bad, and I also use it in my team, but the efficiency is not as good as I expected. (And 360-degree assessment seems to be the only solution that a ScrumMaster can choose. That's bad.) And if this assessment is linked to bonus, or promotion, well, the process becomes a mere formality. (Do you meet the same problem?)

Why do we always link such assessment to bonus and bonus? I guess this IS the MAIN PURPOSE of traditional assessment.

[Hugo] No. We don't link assessment to bonus, but on the contrary, we link bonus to assessment. Of course, we can cut this kind of link to make bonus isolated. But will that be a better way? Or is there a perfect way to give out bonus, instead of linking it to employee's performance, contributions and progress?

I want ask one question, what's the BONUS for?

[Hugo] Bonus is a kind of award to appreciate one employee's contribution, to value his performance and to recognize his progress. 

You can take a look at http://www.alfiekohn.org/books/pbr.htm and http://www.danpink.com/drive 

Bonus scheme is controversial. Some studies also shows that a compensation scheme with high bonus will bring us higher effort and effectiveness than the one without bonus.

http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/14458/1/14458.pdf

Bonus may induce competition and reduce cooperation. But I don't wanna discuss it now. My question is how Scrum handles bonus?

A ScrumMaster can work as a mentor, or a coach, to help team members improve themselves. (Basically, I do the same as you. I encourage team members, help them and even push them.) But what if the ScrumMaster wants to adjust the team organization? What if he wants to kick someone out? What if he wants to invite someone in? Does he need to persuade all team members?

I don't have good answers for the above questions. 

A good ScrumMaster will never do that. 

[Hugo] f you could tell me what a good ScrumMaster will do, I'll appreciate.

Google Michael James scrummaster example checklist 

[Hugo] Thanks!

 

In principle, there is no manager in a Scrum team, so essentially, every team member is the manager. This style is inherited from rugby, but if I'm not mistaken, among hundreds of different popular team sports all over the world, only rugby looks like that. If we look at soccer or basketball or ice hockey or baseball or volleyball, no one looks like that. And even in a rugby game, there is still a referee. So basically, applying Scrum needs some prerequisites. One of the most important prerequisites is that we have to tell the team, as well as the company, that we are a rugby team. Correction, not tell, but convince. 

There are some rules, such as team has to be cross-functional, work has to be done done by the end of sprint, inspect and adapt, time box < 4 weeks etc.  

[Hugo] Yes, there are rules, but not prerequisites. Maybe I'm wrong, nut I persist that we'd better make clear prerequisites prior to applying Scrum in your team.

What do you mean by prerequisites? The pre-conditions for new teams before adoption? If that is what it means, then answer is NO. Even If the pre-condition was really bad, good team will listen to the feedback of sprint and keep improving for ever. Bad team will attribute that to something like scrum. I tried Scrum, but it didn't work for me. The real reason is the bad team never fix the problem exposed by scrum and use the universal DEFAULT solution - ignore it and accuse something else.

[Hugo] Ken Schwaber said the same thing years before, but it is not convincing. 

Scrum is not a religion. If it has weakness, it has weakness. 

The more important thing is 1) we try to figure out the weakness and then solve it, 2) we try figure out the weakness and then warn others before solving it. That is the prerequisite. It is better than just letting the team take the blame.

Change ppl is very difficult. Many will have to learn from mistake. Without making mistake, they will never really learn it. The Scrum rules (actually if you take a look at "the new new product development game" HBR article, those were from there) are very simple, but very few teams really get it.

Try-and-error method is good. Many teams adopt it, but I'm still wondering whether there is better way. More efficient way. 

Scrum rules are simple, that is why different people may have different understandings. That's why I said the manual of Scrum is not precise enough.

[越 裴]

朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department Manager，怎么办？再招一个部门经理？让人事部门兼职？SM负责？大老板负责？集体负责？或者压根就别考虑Scrum？

Scrum鼓励团队成员cross-functional，却不鼓励SM cross-functional，潜台词是选择性鼓励（Selective Encouragement）？

~PY

，

[Jeff Xiong]

这个问题提得就不好。你提这个问题，就是在假设有一个答案。只要照着这个答案去做了，就会有好效果。

没有这种答案。

这话可能不是太容易理解⋯⋯直觉的思维模式很难接受一个事实：所谓未来这种东西，它是还不存在的，它是不可预知的。具体到这个问题就是，你能做的最好的选择就是往前走，有事就做事，有问题就解决问题。你说的各种选择，都可以去试，但是没有哪个选择会保证你得到某个结果。

再说白一点，在没有找到这个部门经理之前，事情就不要做了吗？

2012/2/5 越 裴 <hugo...@live.com>:

[gem fox]

我赞成熊节的观点。

关注于做事，而不是title。

管理流程和风格，别人的永远都只能给你起个借鉴和参考，不论是启发你还是作为反面教材。生搬硬套，难免会自砸双脚。

这东西跟开发中的设计模式一样，必须理解其应用场景，为什么要这样用，以及其局限性，理解知识背后的潜知识，否则似是而非，把事情没做好，还弄得自己不爽。

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jeff Xiong" <gigi...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 05, 2012 11:53 AM
To: <agileto...@googlegroups.com>

[越 裴]

既然我问题提得不好，我就再雕琢一下。

朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department Manager，怎么办？

朋友做SM，解决的办法是他同时也负责团队管理，效果目前还不错，但感觉很怪，一会儿像在S，一会儿像在M，一会儿又像在SM。

不过我的问题不是有没有workaround，大活人还能让尿憋死？但你买了一个手机，发现有摄像头却不能拍照，说明书又不清不楚，然后打电话给客服，客服告诉你”那你就自己琢磨琢磨呗，办法总是有的“，我擦，这一定是没事找抽型的。

我们既然用Scrum，就要用的明白，不能揣着糊涂装明白。遇到问题，解决问题，是我们必须做的，但我们更希望的是在Scrum的体系指导下解决问题，这也是Scrum存在的重要意义。

你不能好心好意地把Scrum介绍给别人，结果发现丫顶多就是一文艺青年，一不牛逼，二不完美，前世是木子美，现世是郭美美，只管床上的事，不管慈善的事，到头来还得你自己费心费力，左右摸索，双手布满老茧，提个问题，还被人说”这个问题提得就不好“，我擦，Scrum能在自己的简历里把自己那些不得不说的事儿说清楚么？

虽然我是SM，但我既不喜欢S，也不喜欢M。Scrum不是万能的，但也不能一会儿拿着HBR的文章说”I can play“，一会儿又说“Don't do it”，玩精神分裂么？你又不是erke，“2 B No.1”。

不好意思，写着写着就有点乱了，有冒昧之处，多担待。

我再把我关于HR的问题整理一下：

• Scrum体系的应用边际在哪里？什么是Scrum不会去碰的？
• Team Management在不在Scrum体系中？如果不在，Scrum对Team Management，AKA. HR things，有没有指导意见？
• Scrum体系鼓励团队成员cross-functional，不什么不鼓励ScrumMaster也cross-functional？

Thanks!

~PY

[Steven Mak]

新思維從來都是不容易推動的，讓組織其他功能部門去接受打破官僚作風是不容易，有的組織中毒很深，但也有例外的；北歐石油公司 Staoil 的消除財
務預算是有名的案例，已經寫過好幾本書， 他們提出的做法和觀點跟 Agile/Scrum 裡面提到的做法都很相似：

http://www.managementexchange.com/story/taking-reality-seriously-towards-more-self-regulating-management-model-statoil

"The Beyond Bureaucracy Challenge" (Gary Hamel 是這活動組織者之一) 裡面還有其他不錯的故
事 ，都是針對消除官僚制度相關的事情。消除官僚制度也是一個大趨勢，去年 HBR 就有一篇 "The end of middle
manager" 的文章： http://hbr.org/2011/01/column-the-end-of-the-middle-manager/ar/1

On Feb 4, 9:41 pm, Shining Hsiong <shining...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 而我为什么说在组织管理层面谈敏捷，就不得不还要谈"管理"呢？是因为敏捷实践大多数是在工程师团队里，而组织里还有大量的非工程师团队，比如人事、销售、市场、财务、还有总经办、董事会。这些体系的人，你让他们接受"无管理"、"自管理"、"无序"、"无计划"、"无文档"，是费劲的事。
>
> 消除管理、KPI无用、层级管理害人，其中的很多观点，其实我都是追崇的。我说的在组织层面要借鉴传统的管理体系的东西，是指在革命成本过高或时机不成熟的情况下，一种在平衡中的适度变革。
>
> 说白了，Scrum
> Team只是一个圈子，圈子内部一套玩法，圈子外部，也就是组织层面的，让他们接受你的玩法，那么你得先按照他们的玩法玩一阵。其实跟Leon的观点也差不多。不知道这是不是Xiong
> Jie想听到的。
>
> 另一个话题，请教一下：大家伙都在读HBR吗？现在整个管理研究界的评论趋势是怎样？
>

> 2012/2/4 Jeff Xiong <gigix1...@gmail.com>

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > 你想多了。我还没有说我有什么观点。我的问题是，熊妍妍的"觉得"是基于什么得出的。我引用HBR那篇文章，是为了指出两个事实：（1）那篇文章的观点与熊妍妍的非常不同；（2）那篇文章基于一家真实的企业20年的运营实例。那么如果没有一个更有力的基础，我觉得这个"觉得"就不是太有说服力。
>
> > 说白了，我对于各种想法啦感觉啦兴趣不大。我更有兴趣了解这些想法背后的支撑（或者没有支撑）。
>

> > 2012/2/4 Leon Shi <leon....@autodesk.com>:

[Steven Mak]

﹣當初 Scrum 為什麼鼓勵 cross-functional team 呢？這個不難 google 的吧。
﹣Team management 到底指什麼呢？"Team Management" 範圍很大，最基本每天 team 裡面每人都會知道其他
team mate 在做什麼是吧。

On Feb 5, 5:32 pm, 越 裴 <hugop...@live.com> wrote:
> 既然我问题提得不好，我就再雕琢一下。
> 朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department Manager，怎么办？
> 朋友做SM，解决的办法是他同时也负责团队管理，效果目前还不错，但感觉很怪，一会儿像在S，一会儿像在M，一会儿又像在SM。
>
> 不过我的问题不是有没有workaround，大活人还能让尿憋死？但你买了一个手机，发现有摄像头却不能拍照，说明书又不清不楚，然后打电话给客服，客服告诉你”那你就自己琢磨琢磨呗，办法总是有的“，我擦，这一定是没事找抽型的。
>
> 我们既然用Scrum，就要用的明白，不能揣着糊涂装明白。遇到问题，解决问题，是我们必须做的，但我们更希望的是在Scrum的体系指导下解决问题，这也是Scrum存在的重要意义。
> 你不能好心好意地把Scrum介绍给别人，结果发现丫顶多就是一文艺青年，一不牛逼，二不完美，前世是木子美，现世是郭美美，只管床上的事，不管慈善的事，到头来还得你自己费心费力，左右摸索，双手布满老茧，提个问题，还被人说”这个问题提得就不好“，我擦，Scrum能在自己的简历里把自己那些不得不说的事儿说清楚么？
> 虽然我是SM，但我既不喜欢S，也不喜欢M。Scrum不是万能的，但也不能一会儿拿着HBR的文章说”I can play“，一会儿又说“Don't do it”，玩精神分裂么？你又不是erke，“2 B No.1”。
>
> 不好意思，写着写着就有点乱了，有冒昧之处，多担待。
> 我再把我关于HR的问题整理一下：
> Scrum体系的应用边际在哪里？什么是Scrum不会去碰的？
> Team Management在不在Scrum体系中？如果不在，Scrum对Team Management，AKA. HR things，有没有指导意见？
> Scrum体系鼓励团队成员cross-functional，不什么不鼓励ScrumMaster也cross-functional？
>
> Thanks!
> ~PY
>
> On Feb 5, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Jeff Xiong wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > 这个问题提得就不好。你提这个问题，就是在假设有一个答案。只要照着这个答案去做了，就会有好效果。
>
> > 没有这种答案。
>
> > 这话可能不是太容易理解⋯⋯直觉的思维模式很难接受一个事实：所谓未来这种东西，它是还不存在的，它是不可预知的。具体到这个问题就是，你能做的最好的选择就是往前走，有事就做事，有问题就解决问题。你说的各种选择，都可以去试，但是没有哪个选择会保证你得到某个结果。
>
> > 再说白一点，在没有找到这个部门经理之前，事情就不要做了吗？
>

> > 2012/2/5 越 裴 <hugop...@live.com>:

> >> 朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department
> >> Manager，怎么办？再招一个部门经理？让人事部门兼职？SM负责？大老板负责？集体负责？或者压根就别考虑Scrum？
>
> >> Scrum鼓励团队成员cross-functional，却不鼓励SM cross-functional，潜台词是选择性鼓励（Selective
> >> Encouragement）？
>
> >> ~PY
> >> ，
>
> >> On Feb 4, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Xu Yi wrote:
>
> >> 晨星这个我在微博上也发过一次：http://weibo.com/1408827293/y2S2t7UlQ
>
> >> 不过作者哈默尔也说了，不是每个企业都可以复制晨星的做法，晨星的做法也远没有到完美的程度。所以，对自己企业来说，还是该干嘛干嘛吧。
>
> >> 至于Scrum Master和什么HR事务，答案非常简单啊“don't do it”。Scrum
> >> Master又不是manager，干这些事情干嘛？这些事情有Line Manager（同义词包括：People Manager、Department
> >> Manager等）去照顾、处理就行了。
>
> >> //徐毅
>

> >> 在 2012年2月4日 下午8:01，Jeff Xiong <gigix1...@gmail.com>写道：
>
> >>> 你想多了。我还没有说我有什么观点。我的问题是，熊妍妍的“觉得”是基于什么得出的。我引用HBR那篇文章，是为了指出两个事实：（1）那篇文章的观点与熊妍妍的非常不同；（2）那篇文章基于一家真实的企业20年的运营实例。那么如果没有一个更有力的基础，我觉得这个“觉得”就不是太有说服力。
>
> >>> 说白了，我对于各种想法啦感觉啦兴趣不大。我更有兴趣了解这些想法背后的支撑（或者没有支撑）。
>

> >>> 2012/2/4 Leon Shi <leon....@autodesk.com>:

> >>>> 若有更多问题，请通过http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN

> >>>> 访问此网上论坛。
>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的“AgileTourChina”论坛。
> >>>> 要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
> >>>> 要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。

> >>>> 若有更多问题，请通过http://groups.google.com/group/agiletourchina?hl=zh-CN

> >>>> 访问此网上论坛。
>
> >>> --
> >>> Jeff Xiong
> >>>www.Gigix.me
>
> >>> --
> >>> 您收到此邮件是因为您订阅了 Google 网上论坛的“AgileTourChina”论坛。
> >>> 要向此网上论坛发帖，请发送电子邮件至 agileto...@googlegroups.com。
> >>> 要取消订阅此网上论坛，请发送电子邮件至 agiletourchin...@googlegroups.com。
>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Xu Yi]

在 2012年2月5日 下午5:32，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com>写道：

既然我问题提得不好，我就再雕琢一下。

朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department Manager，怎么办？

那么这和我之前所言时的情况就有不同，我以为你们是一个比较大的部门，有许多的团队。如果是这么小的一个团队，又能有多少的HR事务呢？不妨建立一些HR方面的简单规则，大家遵守规则即可。至于多数人都关注的奖金一事，则可以以均摊原则处理，共9人的小团队何须在此事上浪费时间，不妨齐心协力提高团队的整体产出，做大蛋糕更为实际。

 

朋友做SM，解决的办法是他同时也负责团队管理，效果目前还不错，但感觉很怪，一会儿像在S，一会儿像在M，一会儿又像在SM。

我猜测你朋友做SM的过程中可能也是觉得事务不够塞满每天的时间吧。既然如此，不妨在SM的角色之外，再兼任另一角色，例如团队成员，做做测试、开发都可以。但是，并不建议兼任管理者的角色。管理者本来是应该承担领导（leadership）的职责，做得好的管理者也确实已经是一位合格的SM，但是在国内的文化影响下，包括管理者自身以及下属对管理者的认知都有一些误解，兼任SM和管理者职务极有可能会影响SM的工作效果以及Scrum的效果。

 

不过我的问题不是有没有workaround，大活人还能让尿憋死？但你买了一个手机，发现有摄像头却不能拍照，说明书又不清不楚，然后打电话给客服，客服告诉你”那你就自己琢磨琢磨呗，办法总是有的“，我擦，这一定是没事找抽型的。

用手机来类比Scrum的情况，其实并不恰当。Scrum乃是“框架”，也即是一个有骨架但无血肉的东西，类似于一个手机的概念设计，摄像头该放于何处等等。使用此类东西，必然得需要使用者费神费力，辅以各种实际操作，从而实现其思想和理念。可能更好的一个比较就是类似于通信业界的3GPP等一类的规范，规范本身非常的清楚，但是每一家厂商应用此规范所实现出来的设备（此处才等同于手机，这样的成品）可能却功能各异，并不完全相同，效果、用户体验、口碑也不同。

 

我们既然用Scrum，就要用的明白，不能揣着糊涂装明白。遇到问题，解决问题，是我们必须做的，但我们更希望的是在Scrum的体系指导下解决问题，这也是Scrum存在的重要意义。 

你不能好心好意地把Scrum介绍给别人，结果发现丫顶多就是一文艺青年，一不牛逼，二不完美，前世是木子美，现世是郭美美，只管床上的事，不管慈善的事，到头来还得你自己费心费力，左右摸索，双手布满老茧，提个问题，还被人说”这个问题提得就不好“，我擦，Scrum能在自己的简历里把自己那些不得不说的事儿说清楚么？

你说的这些“提得不好的问题”或是“不得不说的事儿”在网络上、在线下，已经被无数次地提起，但是出于种种原因，有可能当事者并未看见或搜索得到这些信息，也有可能当事者对他人的意见、告诫视而不见，更甚者，是对Scrum发明者的要求或Scrum体系的原则不甚满意，意欲改变其原则。

网络交流中，尤其是技术交流中，吵架拌嘴的情况多得是，吵到不可开交连朋友都做不了的也有，全看彼此的心态。提问者自觉费心费力提出问题，却得不到态度和煦的回复，殊不知回复者所见识到的此类提问已数量甚多，而基于以往回复的经验或当时的心境、情绪，给出的答案可能是详尽的循循善诱，也可能是直接了当的“请遵循原则”，各自见谅。交流、问答无需只求立等可用的答案。

 

虽然我是SM，但我既不喜欢S，也不喜欢M。Scrum不是万能的，但也不能一会儿拿着HBR的文章说”I can play“，一会儿又说“Don't do it”，玩精神分裂么？你又不是erke，“2 B No.1”。

同样是排泄物，一种东西臭不可闻，而另一种产自婴儿就有人愿意食用，在一些看似相同的事物之间有着微妙而巨大的区别。HBR的文章是描述了一种情况，说明这样的管理理念是可以实现的。而同样的管理理念可否适用于另一个组织，则完全要看它的体质及状况，当然不可贸然施药。

 

不好意思，写着写着就有点乱了，有冒昧之处，多担待。

我再把我关于HR的问题整理一下：

• Scrum体系的应用边际在哪里？什么是Scrum不会去碰的？

这些东西可以先看看www.scrum.org上的Scrum Guide，或者www.scrumalliance.org上的一些文章。可以以这样的方式去看：凡是它没有提到的，就是Scrum不去碰的，或者说不在Scrum的范畴内的。举个具体的例子，Scrum框架本身并未提及如何写高质量的代码，但是在真正去使用Scrum框架，应用于自己组织的时候，最好是可以借鉴其他敏捷方法（例如极限编程）的实践作为补充。

从使用的角度看，是不是Scrum范围内根本不重要，能够用起来产生效果最重要。但是从逻辑、分析、理解的角度，必须得能够区分得开这几个东西之间的边界，才能够更好地识别出问题、定位问题的根源以及解决问题。这是和写代码一样的道理，一个方法写2w行，也可以完成很多功能，但是我们要强调高内聚、低耦合，分成很多个方法和文件，就是为了理清它们的逻辑关系，以便维护以及定位问题。运用敏捷思想提升企业能力也是如此，Scrum+XP还是其他混搭都无所谓，但是执行者务必要能够分清各方法、各实践的边界。

• Team Management在不在Scrum体系中？如果不在，Scrum对Team Management，AKA. HR things，有没有指导意见？

Scrum体系明确要求团队是self-organizing的，这既是他们进行团队管理的方式，也即团队进行自我管理。套用Richard Hackman的团队模型的话，Scrum的团队是在Self-Managing和Self-Designing之间， 要负责“执行团队的任务”、“监控、管理工作相关流程及进展”，可以承担“设计团队以及其组织环境”的职责，但不需要去“设定整体方向”。这一点可以参考他的《Leading Teams》，http://www.amazon.com/Leading-Teams-Setting-Stage-Performances/dp/1578513332。

至于HR部分，可以从www.ayeconference.com上面找到一些信息。

• Scrum体系鼓励团队成员cross-functional，不什么不鼓励ScrumMaster也cross-functional？

这一点也是非常常见的误解，Scrum是鼓励“团队”而不是“团队成员”是cross-functional的。也即团队成员不需要也没有必要什么都能做，那会是啥都不精专的通才、泛才。更多的是在提议通才化专家（Generalizing Specialist），关于这个，可以看Bas Vodde和Craig Larman写的那两本书，里面有相关内容。

从某个角度来看，Scrum都不算是“鼓励”cross-functional，而是事实上的“要求”。因为如果不是跨职能的特性团队，基本上无法做到每个迭代都能够交付产品增量（虽然多数跨职能特性团队也没有做到，但那是因为诸如产品太大的其他原因）。Function在此主要是指代那些requirement analysis, architecture, design, code, test, customer documentation等工作。类似于HR的事务并未被涵盖在Scrum的范围内，它自然也不必要去提某个角色需要承担此责任。组织中本来是由谁处理，那么保持现状即可，因为Scrum并未提及SM要处理此事务。

//徐毅

[越 裴]

说的没错，google很容易，不过您好像没有看清我的问题。我问的是“Scrum为什么不鼓励ScrumMaster也cross-functional”？

真实的项目开发会涉及方方面面的琐碎事情，比如开源产品的许可证使用问题，第三方产品的采购问题等等，这些都是典型的服务型工作，为什么不鼓励ScrumMaster去做？

Ken Schwaber增经把Scrum比喻为象棋（chess），很赏心悦目，开发团队负责下棋，SM负责教下棋，相安无事，不过诸如买棋盘、订场地这类事情谁来做呢？千万别说“该谁做谁做”，这是成心逗闷子。Scrum作为一个体系，除了要有形而上的指导作用，还要有形而下的指导作用，上下相通，才能通则不痛。

关于Team Management，市面上的定义非常多，我就抄一个wikipedia的吧，“Team management refers to techniques, processes and tools for organizing and coordinating a group of individuals working towards a common goal—i.e. a team.” Scrum开发团队是一个自组织团队，这非常酷，但是不是所有和团队相关的事情，都需要自组织？举个简单的例子，由于团队的技术负债偏多，导致产品的基本模块变化频繁，导致团队成员士气低落，这个时候，我们除了要反思和改进之外，还需要做一件事，就是“鼓舞”。我不奢望团队成员都能随时对着镜子高喊“我一定能成功”，所以作为SM，我会去鼓舞他们。这其实就是team management的一项工作。但我还是那个问题，Scrum作为一个体系，对team management的指导意见是怎样的。（不好意思，我在Scrum Guide里没找到相关的细节。）

~PY

[越 裴]

非常感谢！虽然有些方面我持保留意见，不过还是很受启发。

~PY

On Feb 6, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Xu Yi wrote:

在 2012年2月5日 下午5:32，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com>写道：

既然我问题提得不好，我就再雕琢一下。

朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department Manager，怎么办？

那么这和我之前所言时的情况就有不同，我以为你们是一个比较大的部门，有许多的团队。如果是这么小的一个团队，又能有多少的HR事务呢？不妨建立一些HR方面的简单规则，大家遵守规则即可。至于多数人都关注的奖金一事，则可以以均摊原则处理，共9人的小团队何须在此事上浪费时间，不妨齐心协力提高团队的整体产出，做大蛋糕更为实际。

 

朋友做SM，解决的办法是他同时也负责团队管理，效果目前还不错，但感觉很怪，一会儿像在S，一会儿像在M，一会儿又像在SM。

我猜测你朋友做SM的过程中可能也是觉得事务不够塞满每天的时间吧。既然如此，不妨在SM的角色之外，再兼任另一角色，例如团队成员，做做测试、开发都可以。但是，并不建议兼任管理者的角色。管理者本来是应该承担领导（leadership）的职责，做得好的管理者也确实已经是一位合格的SM，但是在国内的文化影响下，包括管理者自身以及下属对管理者的认知都有一些误解，兼任SM和管理者职务极有可能会影响SM的工作效果以及Scrum的效果。

Ken Schwaber自己说过，Scrum Master manages the process。这样的表述一定会引起争议。（忘记是他的哪篇blog了。）

 

不过我的问题不是有没有workaround，大活人还能让尿憋死？但你买了一个手机，发现有摄像头却不能拍照，说明书又不清不楚，然后打电话给客服，客服告诉你”那你就自己琢磨琢磨呗，办法总是有的“，我擦，这一定是没事找抽型的。

用手机来类比Scrum的情况，其实并不恰当。Scrum乃是“框架”，也即是一个有骨架但无血肉的东西，类似于一个手机的概念设计，摄像头该放于何处等等。使用此类东西，必然得需要使用者费神费力，辅以各种实际操作，从而实现其思想和理念。可能更好的一个比较就是类似于通信业界的3GPP等一类的规范，规范本身非常的清楚，但是每一家厂商应用此规范所实现出来的设备（此处才等同于手机，这样的成品）可能却功能各异，并不完全相同，效果、用户体验、口碑也不同。

Scrum到底是“框架”还是“体系”，我想很多人和我同样的疑问。“框架”是形而上的，但Scrum团队往往需要形而下的指导，才能尽可能做的更好。

 

我们既然用Scrum，就要用的明白，不能揣着糊涂装明白。遇到问题，解决问题，是我们必须做的，但我们更希望的是在Scrum的体系指导下解决问题，这也是Scrum存在的重要意义。 

你不能好心好意地把Scrum介绍给别人，结果发现丫顶多就是一文艺青年，一不牛逼，二不完美，前世是木子美，现世是郭美美，只管床上的事，不管慈善的事，到头来还得你自己费心费力，左右摸索，双手布满老茧，提个问题，还被人说”这个问题提得就不好“，我擦，Scrum能在自己的简历里把自己那些不得不说的事儿说清楚么？

你说的这些“提得不好的问题”或是“不得不说的事儿”在网络上、在线下，已经被无数次地提起，但是出于种种原因，有可能当事者并未看见或搜索得到这些信息，也有可能当事者对他人的意见、告诫视而不见，更甚者，是对Scrum发明者的要求或Scrum体系的原则不甚满意，意欲改变其原则。

网络交流中，尤其是技术交流中，吵架拌嘴的情况多得是，吵到不可开交连朋友都做不了的也有，全看彼此的心态。提问者自觉费心费力提出问题，却得不到态度和煦的回复，殊不知回复者所见识到的此类提问已数量甚多，而基于以往回复的经验或当时的心境、情绪，给出的答案可能是详尽的循循善诱，也可能是直接了当的“请遵循原则”，各自见谅。交流、问答无需只求立等可用的答案。

 

虽然我是SM，但我既不喜欢S，也不喜欢M。Scrum不是万能的，但也不能一会儿拿着HBR的文章说”I can play“，一会儿又说“Don't do it”，玩精神分裂么？你又不是erke，“2 B No.1”。

同样是排泄物，一种东西臭不可闻，而另一种产自婴儿就有人愿意食用，在一些看似相同的事物之间有着微妙而巨大的区别。HBR的文章是描述了一种情况，说明这样的管理理念是可以实现的。而同样的管理理念可否适用于另一个组织，则完全要看它的体质及状况，当然不可贸然施药。

首先不好意思，我写东西往往写着写着就收不住了。

其实这些问题，我和很多朋友都探讨过，但很遗憾，没有特别满意的答案。可能和我上面的疑问有关，Scrum到底是“框架”还是“体系”。

作为一套“体系”，如果人们总是用别的管理理论或管理实践，来为Scrum背书，这其实是蛮凄凉的。不过如果作为一套“框架”，那就另当别论了。

 

不好意思，写着写着就有点乱了，有冒昧之处，多担待。

我再把我关于HR的问题整理一下：

• Scrum体系的应用边际在哪里？什么是Scrum不会去碰的？

这些东西可以先看看www.scrum.org上的Scrum Guide，或者www.scrumalliance.org上的一些文章。可以以这样的方式去看：凡是它没有提到的，就是Scrum不去碰的，或者说不在Scrum的范畴内的。举个具体的例子，Scrum框架本身并未提及如何写高质量的代码，但是在真正去使用Scrum框架，应用于自己组织的时候，最好是可以借鉴其他敏捷方法（例如极限编程）的实践作为补充。

从使用的角度看，是不是Scrum范围内根本不重要，能够用起来产生效果最重要。但是从逻辑、分析、理解的角度，必须得能够区分得开这几个东西之间的边界，才能够更好地识别出问题、定位问题的根源以及解决问题。这是和写代码一样的道理，一个方法写2w行，也可以完成很多功能，但是我们要强调高内聚、低耦合，分成很多个方法和文件，就是为了理清它们的逻辑关系，以便维护以及定位问题。运用敏捷思想提升企业能力也是如此，Scrum+XP还是其他混搭都无所谓，但是执行者务必要能够分清各方法、各实践的边界。

这一点倒是颇为实用主义，不管黑猫白猫，能抓到老鼠就是好猫。我不是Scrum原教旨主义者，我本身也同意你的看法，但感觉还是很怪，就好像韩寒对你说，这些书是不是我写的不重要，你读着爽才最重要。最好是，这些书都是韩寒写的，我读着也很爽。

• Team Management在不在Scrum体系中？如果不在，Scrum对Team Management，AKA. HR things，有没有指导意见？

Scrum体系明确要求团队是self-organizing的，这既是他们进行团队管理的方式，也即团队进行自我管理。套用Richard Hackman的团队模型的话，Scrum的团队是在Self-Managing和Self-Designing之间， 要负责“执行团队的任务”、“监控、管理工作相关流程及进展”，可以承担“设计团队以及其组织环境”的职责，但不需要去“设定整体方向”。这一点可以参考他的《Leading Teams》，http://www.amazon.com/Leading-Teams-Setting-Stage-Performances/dp/1578513332。

至于HR部分，可以从www.ayeconference.com上面找到一些信息。

谢谢！

不过不知道这算不算拿Richard Hackman来为Scrum背书？

• Scrum体系鼓励团队成员cross-functional，不什么不鼓励ScrumMaster也cross-functional？

这一点也是非常常见的误解，Scrum是鼓励“团队”而不是“团队成员”是cross-functional的。也即团队成员不需要也没有必要什么都能做，那会是啥都不精专的通才、泛才。更多的是在提议通才化专家（Generalizing Specialist），关于这个，可以看Bas Vodde和Craig Larman写的那两本书，里面有相关内容。

从某个角度来看，Scrum都不算是“鼓励”cross-functional，而是事实上的“要求”。因为如果不是跨职能的特性团队，基本上无法做到每个迭代都能够交付产品增量（虽然多数跨职能特性团队也没有做到，但那是因为诸如产品太大的其他原因）。Function在此主要是指代那些requirement analysis, architecture, design, code, test, customer documentation等工作。类似于HR的事务并未被涵盖在Scrum的范围内，它自然也不必要去提某个角色需要承担此责任。组织中本来是由谁处理，那么保持现状即可，因为Scrum并未提及SM要处理此事务。

这的确是我的误解，我想我关于HR的问题，可以告于段落了。

[Xu Yi]

在 2012年2月6日 下午3:47，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com>写道：

非常感谢！虽然有些方面我持保留意见，不过还是很受启发。

~PY

On Feb 6, 2012, at 2:26 PM, Xu Yi wrote:

在 2012年2月5日 下午5:32，越 裴 <hugo...@live.com>写道：

既然我问题提得不好，我就再雕琢一下。

朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department Manager，怎么办？

那么这和我之前所言时的情况就有不同，我以为你们是一个比较大的部门，有许多的团队。如果是这么小的一个团队，又能有多少的HR事务呢？不妨建立一些HR方面的简单规则，大家遵守规则即可。至于多数人都关注的奖金一事，则可以以均摊原则处理，共9人的小团队何须在此事上浪费时间，不妨齐心协力提高团队的整体产出，做大蛋糕更为实际。

 

朋友做SM，解决的办法是他同时也负责团队管理，效果目前还不错，但感觉很怪，一会儿像在S，一会儿像在M，一会儿又像在SM。

我猜测你朋友做SM的过程中可能也是觉得事务不够塞满每天的时间吧。既然如此，不妨在SM的角色之外，再兼任另一角色，例如团队成员，做做测试、开发都可以。但是，并不建议兼任管理者的角色。管理者本来是应该承担领导（leadership）的职责，做得好的管理者也确实已经是一位合格的SM，但是在国内的文化影响下，包括管理者自身以及下属对管理者的认知都有一些误解，兼任SM和管理者职务极有可能会影响SM的工作效果以及Scrum的效果。

Ken Schwaber自己说过，Scrum Master manages the process。这样的表述一定会引起争议。（忘记是他的哪篇blog了。）

我想他所说的是指“development”这一块相关的process，也即是团队自己管理他们自己用于完成工作的流程。

 

不过我的问题不是有没有workaround，大活人还能让尿憋死？但你买了一个手机，发现有摄像头却不能拍照，说明书又不清不楚，然后打电话给客服，客服告诉你”那你就自己琢磨琢磨呗，办法总是有的“，我擦，这一定是没事找抽型的。

用手机来类比Scrum的情况，其实并不恰当。Scrum乃是“框架”，也即是一个有骨架但无血肉的东西，类似于一个手机的概念设计，摄像头该放于何处等等。使用此类东西，必然得需要使用者费神费力，辅以各种实际操作，从而实现其思想和理念。可能更好的一个比较就是类似于通信业界的3GPP等一类的规范，规范本身非常的清楚，但是每一家厂商应用此规范所实现出来的设备（此处才等同于手机，这样的成品）可能却功能各异，并不完全相同，效果、用户体验、口碑也不同。

Scrum到底是“框架”还是“体系”，我想很多人和我同样的疑问。“框架”是形而上的，但Scrum团队往往需要形而下的指导，才能尽可能做的更好。

 在2011版的Scrum guide中，开篇即是“Scrum (n): A framework within which people can address complex adaptive problems, while productively and creatively delivering products of the highest possible value.”。

- http://www.scrum.org/storage/scrumguides/Scrum_Guide.pdf

在SA的网站上，介绍Scrum自身的页面中也有文字“Scrum is an agile framework for completing complex projects.”

- http://www.scrumalliance.org/pages/what_is_scrum

我不太清楚“体系”你所指的究竟是哪一个词汇，但是通常人们总会以“流程”也即process的标准去要求它，这里不摊开来表达我对此的观点，但只是想说明，Scrum是框架，而不是流程，可能也不是你说的“体系”。

至于你说的“形而下的指导”，这就是包括CST、CSC在内的很多Scrum或敏捷教练、顾问所在做的事情，他们的工作就是帮助组织、企业把Scrum真正地运用起来，产生实际的效果。

我们既然用Scrum，就要用的明白，不能揣着糊涂装明白。遇到问题，解决问题，是我们必须做的，但我们更希望的是在Scrum的体系指导下解决问题，这也是Scrum存在的重要意义。 

你不能好心好意地把Scrum介绍给别人，结果发现丫顶多就是一文艺青年，一不牛逼，二不完美，前世是木子美，现世是郭美美，只管床上的事，不管慈善的事，到头来还得你自己费心费力，左右摸索，双手布满老茧，提个问题，还被人说”这个问题提得就不好“，我擦，Scrum能在自己的简历里把自己那些不得不说的事儿说清楚么？

你说的这些“提得不好的问题”或是“不得不说的事儿”在网络上、在线下，已经被无数次地提起，但是出于种种原因，有可能当事者并未看见或搜索得到这些信息，也有可能当事者对他人的意见、告诫视而不见，更甚者，是对Scrum发明者的要求或Scrum体系的原则不甚满意，意欲改变其原则。

网络交流中，尤其是技术交流中，吵架拌嘴的情况多得是，吵到不可开交连朋友都做不了的也有，全看彼此的心态。提问者自觉费心费力提出问题，却得不到态度和煦的回复，殊不知回复者所见识到的此类提问已数量甚多，而基于以往回复的经验或当时的心境、情绪，给出的答案可能是详尽的循循善诱，也可能是直接了当的“请遵循原则”，各自见谅。交流、问答无需只求立等可用的答案。

 

虽然我是SM，但我既不喜欢S，也不喜欢M。Scrum不是万能的，但也不能一会儿拿着HBR的文章说”I can play“，一会儿又说“Don't do it”，玩精神分裂么？你又不是erke，“2 B No.1”。

同样是排泄物，一种东西臭不可闻，而另一种产自婴儿就有人愿意食用，在一些看似相同的事物之间有着微妙而巨大的区别。HBR的文章是描述了一种情况，说明这样的管理理念是可以实现的。而同样的管理理念可否适用于另一个组织，则完全要看它的体质及状况，当然不可贸然施药。

首先不好意思，我写东西往往写着写着就收不住了。

其实这些问题，我和很多朋友都探讨过，但很遗憾，没有特别满意的答案。可能和我上面的疑问有关，Scrum到底是“框架”还是“体系”。

作为一套“体系”，如果人们总是用别的管理理论或管理实践，来为Scrum背书，这其实是蛮凄凉的。不过如果作为一套“框架”，那就另当别论了。

这一点，说真的，我估摸着你去问Ken Schwaber或者Jeff Sutherland，估计他们的答案你也不一定满意。Scrum本身就是借鉴了很多其他领域的思想和知识所创建出来的，所以提到别的东西，也是很正常的事情。我同样猜测，你或我所最信任、喜爱的某个体系（不限于软件行业），恐怕也都是借鉴了很多别的理论或实践，而不是完全新创的东西。

不好意思，写着写着就有点乱了，有冒昧之处，多担待。

我再把我关于HR的问题整理一下：

• Scrum体系的应用边际在哪里？什么是Scrum不会去碰的？

这些东西可以先看看www.scrum.org上的Scrum Guide，或者www.scrumalliance.org上的一些文章。可以以这样的方式去看：凡是它没有提到的，就是Scrum不去碰的，或者说不在Scrum的范畴内的。举个具体的例子，Scrum框架本身并未提及如何写高质量的代码，但是在真正去使用Scrum框架，应用于自己组织的时候，最好是可以借鉴其他敏捷方法（例如极限编程）的实践作为补充。

从使用的角度看，是不是Scrum范围内根本不重要，能够用起来产生效果最重要。但是从逻辑、分析、理解的角度，必须得能够区分得开这几个东西之间的边界，才能够更好地识别出问题、定位问题的根源以及解决问题。这是和写代码一样的道理，一个方法写2w行，也可以完成很多功能，但是我们要强调高内聚、低耦合，分成很多个方法和文件，就是为了理清它们的逻辑关系，以便维护以及定位问题。运用敏捷思想提升企业能力也是如此，Scrum+XP还是其他混搭都无所谓，但是执行者务必要能够分清各方法、各实践的边界。

这一点倒是颇为实用主义，不管黑猫白猫，能抓到老鼠就是好猫。我不是Scrum原教旨主义者，我本身也同意你的看法，但感觉还是很怪，就好像韩寒对你说，这些书是不是我写的不重要，你读着爽才最重要。最好是，这些书都是韩寒写的，我读着也很爽。

呵呵，我们很介意啊，通常我和别人发生的争执都是在于澄清Scrum的边界时发生的。只是如果询问者或者讨论者对到底什么是Scrum并不感冒，更关注解决问题的话，那么去强调“书是谁写的”，自然也就没有了太大的意义。

分清楚书是谁写的，在发现问题，或者改进的效果不如意的时候，尤为重要。就想debug一样，分不清楚边界，就无法很好地定位问题。像是香草冰淇淋的那种故事，正体现了他们在定位问题时的思路，Scrum和XP都有各自的理论，把他们各自的实践结合在一起的时候，究竟问题出在哪一方或者问题出在我们具体实施的方法、时间点之上，这都需要我们能够分别理解Scrum和XP，才能够更好地定位问题，并且找到解决问题（Scrum+XP的时候一些表现不如人意）的方案。

- http://blog.run2me.com/runliu/archive/2006/06/11/16776.aspx

 

• Team Management在不在Scrum体系中？如果不在，Scrum对Team Management，AKA. HR things，有没有指导意见？

Scrum体系明确要求团队是self-organizing的，这既是他们进行团队管理的方式，也即团队进行自我管理。套用Richard Hackman的团队模型的话，Scrum的团队是在Self-Managing和Self-Designing之间， 要负责“执行团队的任务”、“监控、管理工作相关流程及进展”，可以承担“设计团队以及其组织环境”的职责，但不需要去“设定整体方向”。这一点可以参考他的《Leading Teams》，http://www.amazon.com/Leading-Teams-Setting-Stage-Performances/dp/1578513332。

至于HR部分，可以从www.ayeconference.com上面找到一些信息。

谢谢！

不过不知道这算不算拿Richard Hackman来为Scrum背书？

我觉得不能算，呵呵~

Hackman是研究团队方面的专家，而这个（如自组织团队）其实并不是软件行业的专利，这样的思想早就出现和存在。只能够说Scrum介绍自己时，没有必要讲到自己要求的“Self-Organizing”团队，就要把这一块的知识完整复述一遍，毕竟在他处已经存在这样的信息，“copy & paste”并不是一种好的现象，对吧？

[Steven Mak]

讓我不解的是如果你明白為什麼 Scrum 提倡 Cross-functional team 的時候，為何會問 "Cross
functional Scrum Master" 的問題，所以我還是想你先想好 Cross-functional 是針對什麼問題，然後再考慮
這 "cross functional" 是否也適用在 SM 上。

On Feb 6, 2:48 pm, 越 裴 <hugop...@live.com> wrote:
> 说的没错，google很容易，不过您好像没有看清我的问题。我问的是“Scrum为什么不鼓励ScrumMaster也cross-functional”？
> 真实的项目开发会涉及方方面面的琐碎事情，比如开源产品的许可证使用问题，第三方产品的采购问题等等，这些都是典型的服务型工作，为什么不鼓励ScrumMas ter去做？

> Ken Schwaber增经把Scrum比喻为象棋（chess），很赏心悦目，开发团队负责下棋，SM负责教下棋，相安无事，不过诸如买棋盘、订场地这类事情谁来做 呢？千万别说“该谁做谁做”，这是成心逗闷子。Scrum作为一个体系，除了要有形而上的指导作用，还要有形而下的指导作用，上下相通，才能通则不痛。
>
> 关于Team Management，市面上的定义非常多，我就抄一个wikipedia的吧，“Team management refers to techniques, processes and tools for organizing and coordinating a group of individuals working towards a common goal—i.e. a team.” Scrum开发团队是一个自组织团队，这非常酷，但是不是所有和团队相关的事情，都需要自组织？举个简单的例子，由于团队的技术负债偏多，导致产品的基本模块变 化频繁，导致团队成员士气低落，这个时候，我们除了要反思和改进之外，还需要做一件事，就是“鼓舞”。我不奢望团队成员都能随时对着镜子高喊“我一定能成功”， 所以作为SM，我会去鼓舞他们。这其实就是team management的一项工作。但我还是那个问题，Scrum作为一个体系，对team management的指导意见是怎样的。（不好意思，我在Scrum Guide里没找到相关的细节。）

>
> ~PY
>
> On Feb 6, 2012, at 12:59 PM, Steven Mak wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > ﹣當初 Scrum 為什麼鼓勵 cross-functional team 呢？這個不難 google 的吧。
> > ﹣Team management 到底指什麼呢？"Team Management" 範圍很大，最基本每天 team 裡面每人都會知道其他
> > team mate 在做什麼是吧。
>
> > On Feb 5, 5:32 pm, 越 裴 <hugop...@live.com> wrote:
> >> 既然我问题提得不好，我就再雕琢一下。
> >> 朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department Manager，怎么办？
> >> 朋友做SM，解决的办法是他同时也负责团队管理，效果目前还不错，但感觉很怪，一会儿像在S，一会儿像在M，一会儿又像在SM。
>

> >> 不过我的问题不是有没有workaround，大活人还能让尿憋死？但你买了一个手机，发现有摄像头却不能拍照，说明书又不清不楚，然后打电话给客服，客服告诉 你”那你就自己琢磨琢磨呗，办法总是有的“，我擦，这一定是没事找抽型的。

>
> >> 我们既然用Scrum，就要用的明白，不能揣着糊涂装明白。遇到问题，解决问题，是我们必须做的，但我们更希望的是在Scrum的体系指导下解决问题，这也是S crum存在的重要意义。

> >> 你不能好心好意地把Scrum介绍给别人，结果发现丫顶多就是一文艺青年，一不牛逼，二不完美，前世是木子美，现世是郭美美，只管床上的事，不管慈善的事，到头 来还得你自己费心费力，左右摸索，双手布满老茧，提个问题，还被人说”这个问题提得就不好“，我擦，Scrum能在自己的简历里把自己那些不得不说的事儿说清楚 么？

> >> 虽然我是SM，但我既不喜欢S，也不喜欢M。Scrum不是万能的，但也不能一会儿拿着HBR的文章说”I can play“，一会儿又说“Don't do it”，玩精神分裂么？你又不是erke，“2 B No.1”。
>
> >> 不好意思，写着写着就有点乱了，有冒昧之处，多担待。
> >> 我再把我关于HR的问题整理一下：
> >> Scrum体系的应用边际在哪里？什么是Scrum不会去碰的？
> >> Team Management在不在Scrum体系中？如果不在，Scrum对Team Management，AKA. HR things，有没有指导意见？
> >> Scrum体系鼓励团队成员cross-functional，不什么不鼓励ScrumMaster也cross-functional？
>
> >> Thanks!
> >> ~PY
>
> >> On Feb 5, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Jeff Xiong wrote:
>
> >>> 这个问题提得就不好。你提这个问题，就是在假设有一个答案。只要照着这个答案去做了，就会有好效果。
>
> >>> 没有这种答案。
>

> >>> 这话可能不是太容易理解⋯⋯直觉的思维模式很难接受一个事实：所谓未来这种东西，它是还不存在的，它是不可预知的。具体到这个问题就是，你能做的最好的选择就是 往前走，有事就做事，有问题就解决问题。你说的各种选择，都可以去试，但是没有哪个选择会保证你得到某个结果。

>
> >>> 再说白一点，在没有找到这个部门经理之前，事情就不要做了吗？
>
> >>> 2012/2/5 越 裴 <hugop...@live.com>:
> >>>> 朋友的现实情况，研发部门只有一个团队，包括一个PO，一个SM，七个工程师，没有所谓的Line Manager 或者 Department
> >>>> Manager，怎么办？再招一个部门经理？让人事部门兼职？SM负责？大老板负责？集体负责？或者压根就别考虑Scrum？
>
> >>>> Scrum鼓励团队成员cross-functional，却不鼓励SM cross-functional，潜台词是选择性鼓励（Selective
> >>>> Encouragement）？
>
> >>>> ~PY
> >>>> ，
>
> >>>> On Feb 4, 2012, at 8:51 PM, Xu Yi wrote:
>
> >>>> 晨星这个我在微博上也发过一次：http://weibo.com/1408827293/y2S2t7UlQ
>
> >>>> 不过作者哈默尔也说了，不是每个企业都可以复制晨星的做法，晨星的做法也远没有到完美的程度。所以，对自己企业来说，还是该干嘛干嘛吧。
>
> >>>> 至于Scrum Master和什么HR事务，答案非常简单啊“don't do it”。Scrum
> >>>> Master又不是manager，干这些事情干嘛？这些事情有Line Manager（同义词包括：People Manager、Department
> >>>> Manager等）去照顾、处理就行了。
>
> >>>> //徐毅
>
> >>>> 在 2012年2月4日 下午8:01，Jeff Xiong <gigix1...@gmail.com>写道：
>

> >>>>> 你想多了。我还没有说我有什么观点。我的问题是，熊妍妍的“觉得”是基于什么得出的。我引用HBR那篇文章，是为了指出两个事实：（1）那篇文章的观点与熊妍妍 的非常不同；（2）那篇文章基于一家真实的企业20年的运营实例。那么如果没有一个更有力的基础，我觉得这个“觉得”就不是太有说服力。

>
> >>>>> 说白了，我对于各种想法啦感觉啦兴趣不大。我更有兴趣了解这些想法背后的支撑（或者没有支撑）。
>
> >>>>> 2012/2/4 Leon Shi <leon....@autodesk.com>:
> >>>>>> 呵呵，一直潜水，第一次发言，纯粹观点探讨，表拍砖！
>
> >>>>>> 先表明我的观点：追求理想同时尊重现实，不走极端，借鉴各种方法学，结合起来探索更加多快好省的项目、团队管理方式方法，适合你的现状的就是好的，不适合就大家 一起想办法持续改进！
> >>>>>> 简言之：manager还是要的，不过要换个思路、风格！
>
> >>>>>> 所以对于Shining Hsiong与Jeff Xiong的观点，我是各部分赞同，我的观点：
>

> >>>>>> 1、Scrum提倡manager不干预，只是提倡而已，其实现实层面做不到，至少不能100%做到，有些是因为manager个人素质问题（往好了说是风格问 题），有些的确是现实需要，任何一个商业项目都需要有人负责，不可能没有manager的介入，Scrum是鼓励团队自治、自我激励，但现实组员本身也有疑问， 任何事情没有监管（注意我是说监管而不是控制）是不行的，因为林子大了什么鸟都有，用人不疑也不是说撒手不管；

> >>>>>> 2、仔细看下面HBR的文章，其实作者最后是承认了manager对于组织的必要性，因为纯粹的市场（可以引喻为一堆堆的scrum
> >>>>>> teams），在大规模协同的背景下，是无序的，并不能体现理想模型中市场的效率，需要必要的组织结构去协调，甚至必要情况下控制之；
>
> >>>>>> 3、但是另一方面，在软件行业充分发展的今天，特别是Agile/Scrum/XP流行多年后的背景下，管理方式、风格必须要改革，过往方法如KPI、dail y/weekly

> >>>>>> report等重控制型方法肯定行不通了，一方面是manager已经对经验越来越丰富的工程师们，或复杂度越来越高的项目提不出或难以提出具体指导，另一方面 在信息爆炸、追求个人自由的社会背景下，有良好教育背景的工程师们也不像原来刚出校门那样了，越来越不服管了！
>
> >>>>>> 4、我欣赏一句话，忘了是哪里看到的，说“管理一堆程序员就像带领一群骄傲的猫”，管理者自身要意识到大部分（如果不是全部的话）的工作是需要工程师们去完成、 创新的，为了更好的productivity故，你得要充分尊重他们的决定，甚至要鼓励他们自己做决定，首先要自我定位准确了，你要做的是保持沟通顺畅（比如说 向外、向上）；

> >>>>>> 5、回到Scrum，在大的研发机构里，分工很细，各个项目组之间其实有很多关联，或强或弱，大部分情况下纯粹的Scrum
> >>>>>> Master是比较难做的，很容易与manager们重叠，所以出现manager直接兼任Scrum
> >>>>>> Master的情况是很常见的，不过如果有很强势、经验丰富或者技术牛叉、同时又灵活的人愿意充当Scrum
> >>>>>> Master，自然最好也不过了，这点上我的观点是每个项目的角色定位都要看具体情况，不能一个模式照搬，具体的人很重要；
>
> >>>>>> 呵呵，越写越乱，不成章法，仅供参考！
>
> >>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>> -Leon
>

> ...
>
> read more »