Scribd
Upload
540 views12 pages

Case Study - 5 - Introducing Scrum at

Here are the big 3 factors for an organization to consider when introducing a new methodology like Agile: 1. Change management - Introducing a new methodology requires significant changes to processes, roles, and culture. The organization needs to effectively manage this change through training, communication, and addressing any resistance to change. 2. People and skills - The new methodology may require different skills from team members. The organization needs to assess if current employees have the right skills or need training. It also impacts roles and responsibilities. 3. Process adaptation - The new methodology like Agile will have different processes, meetings, documentation practices etc. The organization needs to thoughtfully adapt their existing processes to align with the new methodology while gaining its benefits

Uploaded by

Nikita Jain
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
540 views12 pages

Case Study - 5 - Introducing Scrum at

Here are the big 3 factors for an organization to consider when introducing a new methodology like Agile: 1. Change management - Introducing a new methodology requires significant changes to processes, roles, and culture. The organization needs to effectively manage this change through training, communication, and addressing any resistance to change. 2. People and skills - The new methodology may require different skills from team members. The organization needs to assess if current employees have the right skills or need training. It also impacts roles and responsibilities. 3. Process adaptation - The new methodology like Agile will have different processes, meetings, documentation practices etc. The organization needs to thoughtfully adapt their existing processes to align with the new methodology while gaining its benefits

Uploaded by

Nikita Jain
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

Case Study – 5 - Introducing Scrum at P2P

Group C
Lets Get an Idea about P2P and Agile
approach
Traditional Approach Agile
Design up front Continous design
Fixed Scope Flexible
Deliverables Features/Requirements
Freeze designs as early as possible Freeze design as late as possible
Low uncertainty High uncertainty
Avoid changes Embrace changes
Agile
Conventional project teams Self Organizing project team approach

Low customer interaction High customer interaction


Waterfall
approach
Big Foot Project Timeline
 Backlogs of second sprint were
taken up.
 Completed the requirement setup my
 Priorities were revised by Isaac
product manager
 80 % of the feature were approved by
Isaac.
 Sprint was Success!

SPRINT 1 SPRINT 3

W1 W2 W3 W4 W1 W2 W3 W4 W1 W2 w3 w4 w1 w2 w3 w4

SPRINT 2 END

 Project took additional three


 Backlogs of first sprint were sprints for completion
taken up.
 Product manager revised the new
requirements in between of sprint
 New implementation was added
 Clients were not satisfied with the
implementation
PART-A Questions!!!
How well is Scrum working?
• For the first half of the project Scrum was WORKING FINE as team was constantly evolving and growing .
• Was welcoming and implementing the suggestions as suggested by Isaac
• Second sprint midway: Scrum master agreed to changes breaking the rule of scrum methodology.
• The project deviated from Scrum guidelines and the team seems less energized and productivity has declined.

Is Prem really playing the role of a Scrum Master?


•Scrum master Role
Prem was task master rather than scrum master
Midway sprint Prem agreed to Isaac’s request to change the work on the second sprint and extending
the deadline.
Violates scrum rule- no changes are introduced once the sprint backlog has been set!
Prem failed in his capacity of Scrum Master to ensure that the process is adhered to. This is the
primary responsibility of a Scrum Master.

Do you see self-organizing teams? Was there a spirit of Agile in the teams?
• Teams were self-organizing when Prem behaved as scrum master.
• During second sprint however traditional approach was followed on!!
What are the issues confronting the Big Foot project in reality? Did they tackle those issues
in the Agile methodology ?

 Lacking of a EFFECTIVE SCRUM MASTER  Deviating from SCRUM RULE of not


changing priorities midway!
 Deviation from AGILE APPROACH
 Shifted from SM to Project Manager  assenting to Isaac’s petition to alter the work
 Assigning tasks to the team on the 2nd dash and widening the deadline. 
 Destroying the concept of self-organizing  no alterations are introduced once the dash
teams backlog has been set! Prem failed in his
capacity of Scrum Master to guarantee that
the procedure is adhered to.
Assume you are Kendra. What would you want to say at the retrospective? How would you say it?

Appreciate the team!

Motivate the team to pull up the socks for the rest of the project

Asking Prem to play the role of a scrum master rather than task manager

Provide an improved documentation practices to get the job done QUICK!!

What are your suggestions on the improvements or changes need to be made in the scrum
process for the progress to happen?

 Estimate how long the product will take to develop in iterative


Estimate together with Stakeholder and priorities
cycles
backlog with them.
 Figure out the best way to meet emerging requirements
Use planning poker to make better estimates  Don’t stretch sprint time

Plan for incremental product delivery  Don’t separate development and testing. Use TTD (Test driven

developments) approaches to mitigate issues.


Establish the business values and priority of each
 Leverage Quality collaboration software's like Jira, Toggl, Git.
increment
PART-B Questions!
What went wrong? What could P2P have done to enhance success?
• The deep involvement of Project Manager for solving the Integration problem deviates the capability of self-
organizing team and came up with a high dependency with Project Manager.

• Product Manager changed the product backlog and added new high priority features in the current sprint

• As per the scrum rule, it is not advisable to change the product backlog- which will deviate the current sprint
plan.

• Eliminating the currently implementing features will  cause below problems :


• Wastage of Spent effort
• Team gets demotivated
• Agility will not be there
• Team need to spend more time and effort on understanding the new requirement and takes too much effort to incorporate the
new changes
• Definitely deviate  the expected sprint plan

• One of the most important functionality did not work as expected along with the newly added feature.

• Team did not get the correct guideline / user scenario prior to the project implementation.
Explain what the product manager (Isaac) could have done better in
contributing towards the success?

• Some of the steps that the project manager could have taken

 Created a definite scope of the project

 Attended the SCRUM meetings on a regular basis so that the team is more clear with the project vision and
everyone can align to the deliverables

 Align with the team with the changes in the scope that might come up so that the team can plan the actions
accordingly.

 Rather than pressurizing the team with the complement of “Agile” we could have mitigated the pressure by
saying a no to the feature that might impact the budget

 Taking feedback from the team in order to understand their vision on the project understanding and update
the product log accordingly thereby not just making the team agile but also being self agile and compatible
with the changes delivered features
Do you think a non-agile model would have taken the same time to
complete the project? Why ?

• Again, in the traditional methodology, we are unable to change the scope of the project. Here, the scope of
the project gets updated in the product backlog along with the correction improvement plans.

 Overall, we would prefer the Agile Project management – Scrum methodology

 Self organized Team

 Each sprint has clear defined requirement scope

 Daily sync-up meetings will reduce the integration issues inside the team

 Review – Retrospective meetings will give the insight of the previous sprint, which helps to identify the
improvement areas in process, implementation, and feature release.

 We can share the incremental progress of the feature / product to the customer through each sprint.

 Team will also get energized and self-motivated while completing each milestones
Can you list big 3 factors for the organization to consider when introducing a new
methodology like Agile?

 Change Adaptation ( Agile Trainings, Culture and psychological aspects of team, Process &

Methods)

 Category of Project ( Technology, Team members, Roles)

 Agile Implementation ( Collaborations , environments, iterations)

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy