>Don't blame the tool when someone misuses the tool.
Sure, but just like when finding the fault with everything indicates the fault is in you if almost everyone misuses a tool the fault is in the tool.
Sure, but just like when finding the fault with everything indicates the fault is in you if almost everyone misuses a tool the fault is in the tool.
Could you provide some material that explains how to do Scrum in a different way?
https://www.scrum.org/resources/scrum-guide
Some quotes to keep in mind:
> 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 exists only in its entirety and functions well as a container for other techniques, methodologies, and practices.
Burndown charts can be used in Scrum, but are not Scrum. Backlog refinement is an ongoing activity in Scrum, but its precise form is left undefined. Story points can be used in Scrum, but are not Scrum. The Scrum Master is a role which is explicitly defined in the Scrum Guide, but there is nothing there claiming they are there to "drive" anything, only be "true leaders who serve the Scrum Team and the larger organization." The retrospective is defined in the Scrum Guide, but its precise form is left undefined.
A scrum master should be a true leader… well, part of being a true leader is being direct and firm when the going gets tough. Push eventually comes to shove. A team isn’t tracking to their goal for the sprint? Push. A team repeatedly fails to meet a prior high water mark for velocity? Shove.
Can you provide some examples of places you’ve worked at that do Scrum in different ways than the common cliché?
Or, more likely I think, because the tool is popular and is used by many companies, is statistically more likely to find it misused.
I would argue however this is not the case for well-designed tools, and then people who are not experts can become experts with such and not misuse, keeping the percentage of misuse of a well-designed tool at an even level as usage increase.
The percentage of misuse rising at a rate nearly equal to its usage rate indicates a poorly designed tool / that something is lacking.