Agile & Scrum
Agile is a set of values for building software when you cannot know everything up front, and Scrum is the most widely used framework that puts those values to work. This Part takes you from the 2001 Manifesto, through XP and Kanban, to every accountability, event and artefact of Scrum, then tests it all on PayPal's company-wide switch to Scrum and on the Medic case. It is one of the most heavily examined topics in the subject.
- You willstate the four Manifesto values and the twelve principles, and cite the right principle to justify agile in a scenario.
- You willjudge when agile fits and when it doesn't, using van Lamsweerde's assumptions and the agile vs plan-driven comparison.
- You willexplain Scrum's accountabilities, five events, three artefacts and their commitments (Scrum Guide 2020), and spot Scrum done wrong.
- You willchoose between Scrum, XP and Kanban, and apply Scrum to the PayPal and Medic cases.
What Agile Is, and What It Isn't
By the late 1990s many software teams felt buried in paperwork. The formal life-cycle models of Part II asked for complete, signed-off documents before any code was written, and by the time the code arrived the world had often moved on. Agile is the answer a group of practitioners gave to that problem: a way of working that steers by feedback from real, running software instead of by a fixed up-front plan.
The root idea: empirical process control exam
Every process has to be kept on track somehow; that is what process control means. Part II introduced the two basic ways of doing it, and agile only makes sense against them, so here they are again in brief.
- Defined process control fixes a well-defined set of steps in advance and follows them, trusting that the same inputs always give the same output. It fits low-volatility, predictable work. You plan what you expect to happen, enforce the plan, and use formal change control, because change is expensive. The slides' analogy is a burger recipe, and the SDLC examples are the waterfall and the V-model.
- Empirical process control means "expect the unexpected": you control the work by observing what actually happens, inspecting it and adapting. It fits complex, volatile, novel work. You learn as you progress, expect and embrace change, inspect and adapt in short development cycles, and treat estimates as indicative only. The slides' analogy is a flight, where the pilot keeps correcting course for the weather, and the examples are Scrum and the other agile frameworks.
Snowbird, 2001: the Agile Alliance
In February 2001, seventeen practitioners of so-called "lightweight" methods met at the Snowbird ski resort in Utah. Between them they represented XP, Scrum, DSDM, Adaptive Software Development, Crystal, FDD and Pragmatic Programming, all methods that played down document-driven development. They found they agreed on a short set of values, wrote them down as the Manifesto for Agile Software Development, and named themselves the Agile Alliance. Some of the methods they represented were already years old, as the timeline shows.
Agile is a set of values, not a process exam
The single most important point about agile is that it is not a single process model. Waterfall tells you which phase comes next; agile does not. Agile is a set of core values (the Manifesto) plus principles that follow from them. Frameworks such as Scrum, XP and Kanban are concrete ways of working that put those values into practice. A framework here means a skeleton of roles, meetings and rules that a team fills in with its own practices.
Two consequences follow, and both are easy marks to lose.
The lecture poll asked "Can we use Agile and Scrum interchangeably?" The answer is no. Agile is the umbrella, and Scrum is one "brand" of it (Mountain Goat Software). A team using Kanban or XP is agile without doing Scrum.
Agile teams still model, document and plan. What they avoid, in the words of the Manifesto's history page (Highsmith), is "hundreds of pages of never-maintained and rarely-used tomes".
Check yourselfA classmate writes: "Agile is a process model, like waterfall, in which the steps are Sprint Planning, Daily Scrum, Review and Retrospective." What is wrong?
Two things. First, agile is not a process model: it is a set of values and principles (the Manifesto). Second, the steps listed are Scrum events, and Scrum is just one framework that puts agile into practice; Kanban and XP are agile too, with no Sprint Planning at all in Kanban. A correct version: "Agile is a set of values and principles; Scrum is one framework that implements them, using events such as Sprint Planning…"
Check yourselfWhich kind of process control is a team using when it plans two weeks of work, shows the result to users, and re-plans based on what they say? Why does that suit most software?
Empirical control: the team observes the result, inspects it with users and adapts the plan. It suits most software because software work is complex and novel, so the outcome can't be predicted precisely up front; a fixed plan (defined control) would only work for low-volatility, predictable work.
- Agile applies empirical process control (inspect and adapt) to software, in place of the defined control of the plan-driven models.
- It began at Snowbird in February 2001, where 17 practitioners wrote the Manifesto and formed the Agile Alliance.
- Agile is a set of values and principles, not a process; Scrum, XP and Kanban are frameworks that implement it. Agile ≠ Scrum, and agile still documents and plans.
The Manifesto: Four Values and Twelve Principles
A process model tells a team what to do; the Manifesto instead tells a team what to prefer when two good things compete for its time. That is why it is so short, and why it applies to Scrum, XP and Kanban alike. This section gives the four values, then the twelve principles that spell out what they mean in practice.
The four values exam
Each value is written as a preference: one thing over another. Read "over" as "more than", not "instead of".
- Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. Motivated people who talk to each other are what solve problems; no tool can fix a team that doesn't collaborate.
- Working software over comprehensive documentation. Progress is shown by software that runs and has been tested. Documents are written when they add value, not by default.
- Customer collaboration over contract negotiation. The customer works with the team throughout, instead of fixing everything in a contract up front and then arguing about every variation (a change to the agreed scope).
- Responding to change over following a plan. Plans are revised as the team learns, and a change is treated as an opportunity, not a deviation to be punished.
Writing "agile means no documentation and no plan" loses marks. The Manifesto's closing line says the right-hand items are not rejected. An agile team writes a backlog, a Definition of Done, release plans and handover documents (§3.9); it just writes no more than it needs.
Check yourselfWhich of these are Agile Manifesto values, word for word? (Select all that apply.)
- Working software over comprehensive documentation
- Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
- Individuals and interactions over tools and documentation
- Responding to change over following a plan
- Simplicity over completeness
A, B and D. C is a near-miss: the real value is individuals and interactions over processes and tools. E is not a value at all; simplicity is principle 10 (below). In an MRQ, ticking C or E would cancel one of your correct ticks.
The twelve principles exam
Behind the four values sit twelve principles. Where a value says what to prefer, a principle says what that looks like day to day. The figure pairs each principle with a practice that realises it, because exam answers earn marks for exactly that link.
In words, with a little more detail where the card is terse:
- Satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software.
- Welcome changing requirements, even late in development, because change is a competitive advantage for the customer.
- Deliver working software frequently, every couple of weeks to every couple of months, preferring the shorter timescale. In Scrum, Sprints are one month or less.
- Business people and developers work together daily. Scrum does this through the Product Owner, XP through the on-site customer.
- Build projects around motivated individuals, give them the support they need, and trust them to get the job done.
- Face-to-face conversation is the most efficient and effective way to communicate.
- Working software is the primary measure of progress, not documents written or phases completed.
- Work at a sustainable pace, one that sponsors, developers and users can keep up constantly and indefinitely.
- Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility.
- Simplicity, "the art of maximizing the amount of work not done", is essential. XP's slogan for this is YAGNI, "you aren't gonna need it".
- The best architectures, requirements and designs emerge from self-organising teams. The 2020 Scrum Guide says "self-managing" instead.
- At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective and adjusts its behaviour. In Scrum this is the Sprint Retrospective.
When you justify agile for a scenario, don't just say "agile is flexible". Name the principle the scenario's facts call for. If requirements will evolve with user feedback, cite principles 2 (welcome change) and 3 (deliver frequently). If the client is available daily, cite principle 4. If the team is burning out on overtime, cite principle 8.
Check yourselfA start-up's founders will test each version of their app on real users and change direction based on what they see. Which two principles best justify using an agile approach?
Principle 2, welcome changing requirements even late, because the founders expect to change direction; and principle 3, deliver working software frequently, because each version has to reach users quickly for their feedback to steer the next one. Principle 1 (early and continuous delivery) would also be a reasonable supporting cite.
Check yourselfExplain two agile principles, each with a practice that realises it (a typical short-answer question).
Any two of these pairs, each explained in a sentence or two:
- Deliver frequently, preferring shorter timescales → Scrum Sprints of one month or less, each ending in a usable Increment.
- Welcome changing requirements → the Product Owner re-orders the Product Backlog every Sprint.
- Sustainable pace → XP's 40-hour week.
- Regular reflection and adjustment → the Sprint Retrospective.
- Simplicity → YAGNI: don't build what you don't need yet.
- Business people and developers work together daily → the Product Owner, or XP's on-site customer.
The agile mindset
Values and principles are words; the lecture's Atlassian video showed what they look like in a real team. What you saw was understanding, collaboration, flexibility, feedback loops and, above all, adapting to change. What you did not see was big up-front planning, detailed documentation, a step-by-step predefined process, or handoffs, where one specialist finishes a piece of work and throws it "over the wall" to the next.
A thought process of "understanding, collaborating, learning, and staying flexible to achieve high-performing results". The mindset matters more than the ceremonies: a team that holds the meetings without understanding why does not become agile.
Why does it matter so much? Studies attribute 60–80% of project failures to poor requirements gathering, analysis and change management, which are exactly the things an agile mindset keeps revisiting. The mindset rests on four pillars.
The second pillar has a memorable picture behind it. If you paint a house and only check the colour at the end, a wrong colour means repainting the whole house. If you paint one wall and check it first, a mistake costs one wall. Small batches catch defects while they are still cheap.
Agile is also both iterative and incremental (Mountain Goat Software). Incremental means adding new pieces of value one at a time; iterative means improving what already exists through feedback. An agile team does both in every cycle.
- Four values, each "X over Y": individuals and interactions, working software, customer collaboration, responding to change. The right-hand items are still valued.
- Twelve principles turn the values into practice; in an answer, cite the principle the scenario needs (e.g. 2 and 3 for evolving requirements).
- The agile mindset (understanding, collaborating, learning, staying flexible) stands on four pillars: respect, sustainable flow, innovation, relentless improvement. Agile is iterative and incremental.
When Agile Fits, and When It Doesn't
Agile is not automatically better than a plan-driven process. It rests on some strong assumptions about the project, and when those fail, pure agile can do real harm, for example in safety-critical software. This section gives you the tools to decide: van Lamsweerde's assumptions, a side-by-side comparison of the two philosophies, and the subject's guidance on when to choose each.
Agile's hidden assumptions (van Lamsweerde 2009) exam
Agile arose as a reaction to heavyweight, ceremony-laden processes. The T02 reading, from van Lamsweerde's requirements-engineering textbook, points out that it only works if some strong assumptions hold. Each row below gives an assumption and what you need instead when it fails. A stakeholder is anyone with an interest in or influence over the project (customer, user, sponsor, maintainer, regulator); an NFR (non-functional requirement) is a quality the system must have, such as reliability or speed, as opposed to a feature.
| # | Agile assumes… | When that fails… |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | All stakeholder roles (customer, user…) can be reduced to one role. | Conflicting stakeholders need explicit negotiation. |
| 2 slides | The project fits one small, single-location team. | Large or distributed work needs scaling (Part XI) and coordination documents. |
| 3 slides | The user is available on site, or can respond promptly. | The feedback loops stall. |
| 4 slides | The project is simple and non-critical, so NFRs, the environment, alternatives and risks need little attention. | Critical systems need up-front NFR and risk analysis. |
| 5 | The user supplies increments quickly and consistently (so no conflict management is needed), and from essential to less important (so no prioritisation is needed). | Explicit prioritisation and conflict resolution are needed. |
| 6 | Little documentation is needed for coordination or maintenance, and a precise spec before coding doesn't matter. | Contracts, regulators or a separate maintainer need documents. |
| 7 slides | Verifying requirements before coding matters less than early release. | Fails in critical systems, where late errors are unacceptable. |
| 8 slides | Changes won't force major refactoring, and the developers will maintain the product. | The architecture must be designed up front, and handover documents written. |
The lecture slides list only assumptions 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 (tagged above), and ask whether the critical parts of safety- or mission-critical systems should be built with agile. T02 gives air traffic control, power plants and banking as examples of systems that break the assumptions, and adds that "Most projects obviously do not meet them all, if any."
You don't choose between "fully agile" and "not agile at all". You can do more or less requirements elicitation (finding out), evaluation (weighing options and conflicts), specification (writing them down) and consolidation (checking and agreeing them) before coding, depending on which assumptions hold. This sliding scale is the basis for hybrid approaches.
Check yourselfWhich of these are among van Lamsweerde's agile assumptions? (Select all that apply.)
- The user is available on site or can respond promptly.
- The project needs a detailed baseline schedule.
- The developers will maintain the product.
- The team is large and distributed across sites.
- All stakeholder roles can be reduced to one role.
A, C and E (assumptions 3, 8 and 1). B is a plan-driven practice, not an agile assumption. D is the opposite of assumption 2, which assumes one small, single-location team.
Check yourselfA bank's new core ledger system will be maintained by a separate operations team after go-live, and errors found late could misstate customer balances. Which assumptions does this break, and what should the process add?
It breaks assumption 8 (the developers won't maintain it), assumption 7 (late errors are unacceptable, so verifying requirements before coding matters) and assumption 4 (it is critical, so risks and NFRs need attention), and probably 6 (documentation is needed). Banking is one of T02's own examples. The process should add up-front NFR and risk analysis, more specification and verification for the critical parts, an up-front architecture, and handover documents, while still iterating on less critical parts. Agility is not binary.
Agile versus plan-driven, side by side exam
The process models themselves are in Part II; here the two philosophies are compared row by row. The first row is the root difference: plan-driven processes assume the work can be defined as predictable, repeatable steps, while agile controls it empirically. Every other row follows from that. (A baseline is an approved, frozen version of a plan that progress is measured against; a backlog is an ordered to-do list of work.)
| Plan-driven (formal) | Agile | |
|---|---|---|
| Process control | Defined: predictable, repeatable steps | Empirical: inspect and adapt |
| Requirements | Complete and signed off up front | Emerge, refined just in time |
| Planning | Detailed baseline plan; change controlled | Rolling plans, re-planned every iteration |
| Customer | Involved at the start and end | Continuously involved (PO / on-site customer) |
| Documentation | Comprehensive; the main communication channel | Just enough; face-to-face preferred |
| Delivery and progress | One late release; progress measured by phase completion | Frequent usable increments; progress measured by working software |
| Team | Specialists with handoffs; PM assigns work | Small, cross-functional, self-managing |
| Risk and change | Analysed up front; change is expensive | Exposed early; change is absorbed by re-ordering the backlog |
Choosing: formal, agile or hybrid exam
The W02 summary and T02 give guidance on when to choose each approach. Match the project's facts to a column, and quote those facts in your answer.
Formal (plan-driven)
The customer knows exactly what they want; little change is expected; requirements are clearly documented; the technology is mature and well known; the system is large-scale.Agile
The customer gives time to the project; requirements keep emerging; change is welcome.Hybrid
The client has an established prescriptive model, or only some agile assumptions hold. For example, plan scope and architecture formally, then execute in Scrum Sprints. Organisations "typically" blend the two.The lecture poll scenarios apply this guidance, and they are worth memorising as patterns.
Three misconceptions (T02)
T02 warns about three ways teams fool themselves into thinking they are agile:
- Slipping back into waterfall when the team comes under pressure: dropping reviews and feedback and reverting to "big plan, code, test at the end".
- Doing many short waterfalls and calling it agile.
- Waterfall masquerading as agile: using the label without the frequent iteration, collaboration or flexibility.
Check yourselfA government client insists on its own phase-gate approval process, but its user team is keen to see working features every few weeks. Formal, agile or hybrid?
Hybrid. The client has an established prescriptive model (the phase gates), which the guidance lists as a reason for hybrid, yet only some agile assumptions hold and the users want frequent increments. Plan scope and architecture formally to pass the gates, then execute in Scrum Sprints with demonstrations every few weeks.
- Agile assumes one stakeholder role, a small co-located team, an available user, a simple non-critical system, quick and ordered feedback, little documentation, early release over verification, and developers who maintain the product. The slides list 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8.
- "Agility is not binary": do more or less up-front requirements work as the assumptions dictate, which leads to hybrids.
- Plan-driven = defined control, big up-front plan, one late release; agile = empirical control, rolling plans, frequent increments. Choose formal for known, stable requirements; agile for emerging ones; hybrid in between. Beware short waterfalls.
eXtreme Programming (XP)
The Manifesto says what to value, but a team still has to write the code somehow. XP is the agile framework that answers the engineering question: which programming practices let a team release often without the code falling apart?
Origins, purpose and name
XP was developed by Kent Beck in the late 1990s on Chrysler's C3 payroll project, with Ron Jeffries as coach, and Beck published Extreme Programming Explained in 1999. Its purpose is frequent releases in short development cycles, which improve productivity and create checkpoints where new customer requirements can be adopted. Of all the agile frameworks, XP is the most engineering-specific.
The name comes from taking good practices to extremes. If code review is good, review all the time: that is pair programming, two programmers at one keyboard, one typing and one reviewing. If testing is good, test first: that is test-driven development (TDD), where you write a failing automated test before the code that makes it pass.
Five values and twelve practices
XP has five values: communication, simplicity, feedback, courage and respect. Respect was added in 2004. The 12 original practices fall into four groups, shown below. A few need defining: the planning game is XP's planning meeting, where the customer picks the stories (small features) for the next cycle and the developers estimate them; continuous integration (CI) means merging and testing everyone's code many times a day; refactoring is improving the code's structure without changing its behaviour; collective code ownership means anyone may change any code; and the system metaphor is a shared story of how the system works.
Roles, fit and criticisms
XP defines four roles. The Customer decides the features, the acceptance criteria (the tests a feature must pass to be accepted), the budget and the order of work. Everyone else on the team is a Developer. An optional Tracker tracks metrics, and a Coach mentors the team on the practices.
- Requirements are changing.
- A fixed-time project uses new technology.
- The team is small and co-located.
- Automated testing is possible.
- The on-site customer is a single point of failure.
- There is no big design up front.
- Informal changes lead to scope creep.
- The practices are interdependent, so adopting only some of them can fail.
Check yourselfWhich of these are XP values? (Select all that apply.)
- Courage
- Commitment
- Simplicity
- Focus
- Feedback
A, C and E. XP's five are communication, simplicity, feedback, courage and respect. Commitment and focus are Scrum values (§3.6), a favourite trap because both lists include courage and respect.
Check yourselfAn XP team's on-site customer goes on six weeks' leave and nobody replaces her. Which criticism of XP does this illustrate, and what happens to the team?
The single point of failure: the Customer alone decides features, acceptance criteria and order. Without her the planning game can't pick stories and nobody can confirm a feature is acceptable, so the fine-scale feedback loop stalls (the same failure as van Lamsweerde's assumption 3, "the user is available").
- XP (Kent Beck, C3 project, book 1999) is the engineering-focused agile framework: frequent releases in short cycles, with checkpoints for new requirements.
- Five values: communication, simplicity, feedback, courage, respect. Twelve practices in four groups: fine-scale feedback, continuous process, shared understanding, programmer welfare.
- Roles: Customer, Developer, Tracker (optional), Coach. Fits changing requirements, small co-located teams and automatable tests; weak points are the single on-site customer, no up-front design, scope creep and interdependent practices.
Kanban: Visualise Work, Limit WIP
Some teams don't work on a planned product at all: a support desk, for example, gets an unpredictable stream of tickets. Planning two weeks ahead makes little sense there. Kanban solves the problem of keeping such a stream flowing smoothly, by making the work visible and refusing to start more than the team can finish.
Origins and core ideas
Kanban is Japanese for "billboard", and it began as a Toyota lean manufacturing method. Its core ideas are to visualise work, limit work in progress (WIP) and maximise efficiency. Work in progress means items that have been started but not finished. The aim is to reduce the time from start to finish, the lead time.
Lead time: how long an item takes from being requested to being finished. Cycle time: how long it takes from when work on it starts to when it finishes. Throughput: how many items are finished per unit of time. A bottleneck is the stage that limits how fast work flows through the whole system.
The five fundamentals (Kanban Tool guide)
- Visualise the workflow with cards on a board that has a column per stage.
- Limit WIP by giving each column a maximum number of cards. This exposes bottlenecks.
- Manage flow by measuring and improving lead time, cycle time and throughput.
- Make policies explicit, for example what "done" means for each column.
- Improve continuously.
Pull, not push
Kanban is a pull system: a stage takes new work only when it has capacity, and work is never pushed onto a stage that is full. It has no prescribed roles and no iterations, so delivery is continuous and priorities can change at any time; the next card pulled is simply whatever is at the top of "To Do" at that moment.
A WIP limit doing its job
The guide's example board has four columns: To Do, Develop (WIP limit 3), Test (WIP limit 2) and Done. Step through it to see how the limit turns an invisible problem into a visible one. Steps 3 and 4 continue the guide's example to show the pull in action.
- The board: To Do holds C7–C9, Develop holds C4–C6 (3 of its 3 allowed), Test holds C2 and C3 (2 of its 2 allowed) and Done holds C1. Each WIP limit is an explicit policy on the board.
- A developer finishes C4 and wants to pass it on, but Test is full (2/2), so C4 cannot be pushed on. Without the limit, C4 would simply join an ever-growing test queue and nobody would notice.
- Develop is also at its limit, so the developer can't start C7 either. Instead, the developer helps testing. The WIP limit has exposed the bottleneck: testing is the stage holding the whole system back.
- With help, C2 passes testing and moves to Done. Test now has a free slot, so it pulls C4. Develop drops to 2/3.
- Develop has capacity again, so it pulls C7, the top card of To Do. Nobody assigned it: the free slot pulled it. That is continuous, pull-based flow, with no Sprints.
Check yourselfOn a Kanban board, the Review column has a WIP limit of 2 and holds 2 cards. A developer has just finished coding a card. What should she do, and what has the board told the team?
She must not push the card into Review, because the column is at its limit. She should help clear Review (for example by reviewing one of the two cards), so that Review can pull the next card. The board has exposed a bottleneck at Review, which the team can now fix (more reviewers, smaller cards, a clearer review policy).
Check yourselfWhich statements about Kanban are true? (Select all that apply.)
- It is a pull system.
- It prescribes a Kanban Master role.
- Its main aim is to reduce lead time.
- Work is planned in fixed two-week iterations.
- Priorities can change at any time.
A, C and E. Kanban has no prescribed roles (B is false) and no iterations (D is false): delivery is continuous.
- Kanban ("billboard", from Toyota's lean manufacturing): visualise work, limit WIP, maximise efficiency, to cut lead time.
- Five fundamentals: visualise the workflow, limit WIP, manage flow (lead time, cycle time, throughput), make policies explicit, improve continuously.
- A pull system with no prescribed roles and no iterations; WIP limits stop overloading and expose bottlenecks.
Scrum: Definition, Pillars and Values
Scrum is the framework the rest of this Part, and much of the subject, is built on. Before its parts (people, events, artefacts) make sense, you need to know what Scrum is for, the theory it rests on, and the values it asks a team to live by.
Origins
Scrum's roots go back to 1986, when Takeuchi and Nonaka's Harvard Business Review paper "The New New Product Development Game" used a rugby analogy: in a rugby scrum the whole team moves down the field together as a unit, instead of passing a baton from runner to runner as in a relay. The first implementation followed in 1993 at Easel Corporation. In 1995, Jeff Sutherland and Ken Schwaber presented "The SCRUM Development Process" at the OOPSLA conference. The first Scrum Guide appeared in 2010, and the current version is from 2020 (the timeline in §3.1).
Mike Cohn added user stories and story points to Scrum practice. These are complementary practices, not part of the Scrum Guide; Part VI covers them.
What Scrum is exam
Scrum Guide 2020: "A lightweight framework that helps people, teams and organizations generate value through adaptive solutions for complex problems."
Scrum Primer: "an iterative, incremental framework for projects and product or application development."
It follows that Scrum is not a programming method (it says nothing about how to write code) and not IT-specific: it could organise a marketing campaign. As the slides put it, Scrum is a way to organise groups of people to deliver something. It is also purposefully incomplete, so other practices, such as XP's engineering practices, fit inside it. Even so, the Guide warns: "implementing only parts of Scrum is possible, but the result is not Scrum."
Scrum in one picture
The slides summarise the whole framework in one diagram, redrawn below. Everything in it is explained in the next three sections; for now, follow the arrows and notice that the cycle never stops: the next Sprint starts the moment the last one ends. A Sprint is a fixed-length cycle of one month or less in which the team turns backlog items into a usable piece of product.
The slide's version of this diagram labels Sprint Planning "Part 1 and 2", the older split into a what part and a how part. The 2020 Guide instead gives Sprint Planning three topics: why, what and how (§3.8). Use the 2020 version in answers, but recognise the older label if you see it.
Foundations and the three pillars exam
Scrum is founded on empiricism and lean thinking. Empiricism means knowledge comes from experience, and decisions are based on what is observed (the empirical control of §3.1). Lean thinking means reducing waste and focusing on the essentials. On that foundation Scrum uses an iterative, incremental approach to optimise predictability and control risk, and the team collectively has all the skills needed to do the work. Empiricism is held up by three pillars.
| Pillar | Meaning | Supported by |
|---|---|---|
| Transparency | Process and work are visible to those doing it and those receiving it | Artefacts and their commitments |
| Inspection | Artefacts and progress toward goals are inspected frequently and diligently, to detect problems | The five events |
| Adaptation | When something deviates outside acceptable limits, adjust as soon as possible | Self-managing, empowered teams |
The five Scrum values
Scrum asks the team to live five values: commitment to the team's goals and to each other; focus on the Sprint's work; openness about the work and its challenges; respect for each other as capable, independent people; and courage to do the right thing and tackle tough problems. When the team lives these values, the pillars "come to life" and build trust. XP's values overlap with these, which is a frequent source of MCQ distractors.
Check yourselfWhich part of Scrum mainly supports the pillar of inspection?
- The artefacts and their commitments
- The five events
- Self-managing teams
- The Scrum values
B, the five events. Each event is a formal opportunity to inspect and adapt. A supports transparency, and C supports adaptation.
Check yourselfA manager says: "We'll adopt Scrum, but skip the Retrospectives and keep our own task-assignment process." Is the result Scrum?
No. Scrum is purposefully incomplete, so you may add practices to it, but the Guide says "implementing only parts of Scrum is possible, but the result is not Scrum." Dropping an event (the Retrospective) and overriding self-management removes parts of the framework, and loses the adaptation pillar.
- Scrum (Guide 2020): "a lightweight framework that helps people, teams and organizations generate value through adaptive solutions for complex problems". Not a programming method, not IT-specific, purposefully incomplete; partial Scrum is not Scrum.
- Founded on empiricism and lean thinking; three pillars: transparency (artefacts), inspection (events), adaptation (self-management).
- Five values: commitment, focus, openness, respect, courage (shared with XP: courage, respect).
The Scrum Team and Its Accountabilities
In a plan-driven project one person, the project manager, plans the work, assigns it and answers for the result. Scrum deliberately splits that job three ways, so that nobody is both deciding what to build and dictating how. This section covers who is in a Scrum Team, what each of the three accountabilities answers for, and how they differ from a traditional PM.
The team as a whole exam
The Scrum Team is made up of one Product Owner, the Developers and one Scrum Master. It is typically 10 or fewer people, with no sub-teams or hierarchies, and it pursues one Product Goal at a time. It is cross-functional, meaning that between them the members have all the skills needed to deliver, and self-managing, meaning the team itself decides who does what, when and how. Outside the team are the stakeholders: users, customers, managers and anyone else with an interest in the product.
The 2020 Guide says "accountabilities" where earlier versions said "roles", and "Developers" where they said "Development Team". The slides use both sets of terms. This Part follows the 2020 wording; treat the older words as synonyms if a question uses them. "Developers" includes everyone who builds the Increment, including testers and designers, not only programmers.
If a team grows too large, it should split into several cohesive Scrum Teams that share one Product Goal, one Product Backlog and one Product Owner (and, as §3.9 shows, one Definition of Done).
The Developers
The Developers are the people who create the usable Increment each Sprint (an Increment is a working, tested addition to the product; §3.9). They are accountable for creating the Sprint Backlog (the Sprint's plan), following the Definition of Done (the quality bar), adapting the plan each day toward the Sprint Goal, and holding each other accountable as professionals. The slide shows them covering self-organisation, design, development, UX, testing and delivery: everything needed to get from an idea to a usable product.
The Product Owner
The Product Owner (PO) is accountable for maximising the value of the product and for managing the Product Backlog. In practice that means:
- developing and explicitly communicating the Product Goal, the long-term objective;
- creating and clearly communicating Product Backlog items;
- ordering the items, i.e. deciding what is done first;
- keeping the Product Backlog transparent, visible and understood.
A few rules govern the PO. The PO may delegate this work to others, but stays accountable for it. The PO is one person, not a committee, so anyone who wants to change the backlog must convince the PO, and for the PO to succeed the whole organisation must respect the PO's decisions. Finally, only the PO can cancel a Sprint (§3.8).
The Scrum Master
The Scrum Master (SM) is accountable for establishing Scrum as the Guide defines it and for the Scrum Team's effectiveness. The Guide calls Scrum Masters "true leaders who serve", the idea of servant leadership: leading by removing obstacles and growing people's ability, not by giving orders. The SM serves three groups.
The slide adds a practical view (Atlassian) of what an SM actually spends time on: fostering communication, protecting the team from disruptive managers, Jira administration, burndown and velocity reporting, meeting facilitation, agile coaching, team support and removing blockers. (A blocker or impediment is anything stopping the team from progressing, such as a missing test server or a slow approval.)
In the tutorial role-play the accountabilities showed up like this. The PO updated and re-prioritised the backlog and answered questions. The SM facilitated without dominating: they organised the estimation votes (all Developers vote), built consensus and made sure everyone contributed. The Developers questioned the PO and estimated the items. The estimation mechanics are in Part VI.
Scrum Master vs traditional PM vs Product Owner exam
The sharpest difference between these three is leadership style. The traditional PM commands and controls, the Scrum Master serves, and the Product Owner decides what is built and in what order.
| Traditional PM (Part I) | Scrum Master | Product Owner | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accountable for | Scope, time, cost | Scrum enacted; team effectiveness | Product value |
| Style | Command and control | Servant leader, coach, facilitator | Decision-maker on what and in what order |
| Owns the plan | Schedule, WBS, baselines | No (Developers own the Sprint Backlog) | Product Backlog, Product Goal |
| Assigns tasks | Yes | No; the team self-manages | No; never decides how |
| Progress | Status reports, corrective action | Makes progress transparent | Inspects the Increment; decides on release |
(A WBS, work breakdown structure, is the PM's tree of all the work, from Part VIII.) Pure Scrum has no PM role at all. Instead, the PM's activities are shared among the PO, the SM and the Developers (W01).
Check yourselfWhich statements about the Product Owner are correct under the 2020 Scrum Guide? (Select all that apply.)
- The PO may delegate backlog work but remains accountable.
- A steering committee may act as PO if it votes.
- Only the PO can cancel a Sprint.
- The PO decides how the Developers implement each item.
- The PO must attend every Daily Scrum.
A and C. B is wrong: the PO is one person, not a committee. D is wrong: the PO never decides how; that is the Developers' sole call. E is wrong: the Daily Scrum is for the Developers, and the PO joins only if working on Sprint Backlog items (the slide's "participating in daily scrums" predates this).
Check yourselfA newly appointed Scrum Master starts handing out tasks each morning and rating each developer's output at the end of the Sprint. What is wrong, and what should she do instead?
She is acting as a command-and-control manager. In Scrum the Developers self-manage: they decide who does what and own the Sprint Backlog, and the SM neither assigns nor appraises work. As a servant leader she should coach self-management, facilitate the events (keeping them in their timebox), cause impediments to be removed and protect the team from disruption.
Check yourselfA Scrum Team has grown to 16 people. What does the Guide recommend, and what must the resulting teams share?
Split into several cohesive Scrum Teams, each typically 10 or fewer, focused on the same product. They share one Product Goal, one Product Backlog and one Product Owner, and (from §3.9) one Definition of Done.
- Scrum Team = PO + Developers + SM; 10 or fewer; no sub-teams or hierarchy; one Product Goal; cross-functional and self-managing. 2020 terms: "accountabilities", "Developers".
- PO: maximises value, owns and orders the Product Backlog and Product Goal; one person; only one who can cancel a Sprint. Developers: create the Increment and Sprint Backlog, follow the DoD. SM: servant leader accountable for establishing Scrum and team effectiveness, serving team, PO and organisation.
- PM = command and control; SM = servant leader; PO = decides what and in what order. Pure Scrum has no PM: the work is split across PO, Developers and SM.
The Five Scrum Events
Empirical control only works if inspection and adaptation actually happen, regularly and on time, rather than "when we get round to it". Scrum guarantees this with five fixed events. Each one is a formal opportunity to inspect and adapt, and because they cover everything the team needs to discuss, they also reduce the need for other meetings.
The events, one by one exam
- The Sprint. The Sprint is the container for all the other events. It has a fixed length of one month or less, and the next Sprint starts immediately after the previous one ends. During the Sprint, no changes are made that would endanger the Sprint Goal, and quality does not decrease; meanwhile the Product Backlog is refined as needed, and scope may be clarified and renegotiated with the Product Owner as more is learned. Only the PO can cancel a Sprint, and only if the Sprint Goal becomes obsolete.
- Sprint Planning. The whole Scrum Team answers three questions. Why is this Sprint valuable? The answer becomes the Sprint Goal. What can be Done this Sprint? The Developers answer by selecting items, using their past performance, their capacity and the Definition of Done. How will the chosen work get done? The Developers decompose items, often into tasks of a day or less, and this is their sole call. The output is the Sprint Backlog.
- Daily Scrum. A 15-minute event for the Developers, held at the same time and place every working day. Its purpose is to inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal and adapt the plan for the next day. The format is up to the Developers, so the classic "three questions" (what did I do yesterday, what will I do today, what is blocking me?) are optional.
- Sprint Review. The Scrum Team and key stakeholders inspect the outcome of the Sprint and progress toward the Product Goal, and adapt the Product Backlog. The Guide calls it "a working session", not a presentation.
- Sprint Retrospective. The team plans ways to increase quality and effectiveness, inspecting individuals, interactions, processes, tools and the Definition of Done. Improvements can go into the next Sprint Backlog. The Retrospective concludes the Sprint.
Backlog refinement, breaking down and adding detail to Product Backlog items so they are ready for a future Sprint, is an ongoing activity, not one of the five events. An MCQ listing "Backlog Refinement" among the Scrum events is a trap.
A full Sprint, step by step
Here is one complete Sprint from start to finish, with the artefacts flowing between the events. Gold marks what is happening at each step.
- Before the Sprint. The Product Owner has an ordered Product Backlog, most valuable items on top, all serving the Product Goal. Nothing has been committed for the Sprint yet.
- Sprint Planning (whole Scrum Team; at most 8 h for a one-month Sprint). Why: the team agrees a Sprint Goal. What: the Developers select top items using past performance, capacity and the DoD. How: the Developers break them into tasks, often a day or less. The result is the Sprint Backlog.
- Daily Scrums, every working day: 15 minutes, same time and place, for the Developers. They inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal and adapt the plan for the next day. Meanwhile, refinement continues and scope can be renegotiated with the PO, but nothing may endanger the Sprint Goal.
- Items that meet the Definition of Done form the Increment. A Sprint can produce several Increments, and they can even be released before the Review. Work that isn't Done is not part of it.
- Sprint Review (at most 4 h): the Scrum Team and key stakeholders inspect the Increment and progress toward the Product Goal, then adapt the Product Backlog (the dashed arrow). It is a working session, not a demo-and-sign-off.
- Sprint Retrospective (at most 3 h): the Scrum Team inspects individuals, interactions, processes, tools and the DoD, and plans improvements to quality and effectiveness; an improvement can go straight into the next Sprint Backlog. The Retrospective concludes the Sprint.
- There is no gap: the next Sprint starts immediately with Sprint Planning, from the newly adapted Product Backlog.
Sprint Planning in detail
Sprint Planning is where the Sprint's commitment is made, so it is worth looking at its three topics more closely. Note who answers each one: the whole team agrees why, but only the Developers decide what they can do and how. (Part VI shows the estimation and capacity numbers behind the "what".)
- The inputs: the Product Goal, the ordered Product Backlog, the Developers' past performance, their capacity this Sprint (who is available), and the Definition of Done that every item must meet.
- Why? The whole Scrum Team agrees why this Sprint is valuable. The answer becomes the Sprint Goal, the single objective that gives the Sprint its focus.
- What? The Developers select the items they can bring to Done, judged against past performance, capacity and the DoD.
- How? The Developers plan the work, often decomposing items into tasks of a day or less. How is their sole call: neither the PO nor the SM decides it.
- Together, Goal (why) + items (what) + plan (how) are the Sprint Backlog, made by and for the Developers.
Timeboxes exam
A timebox is a fixed maximum length for an event: when time is up, the event ends. The Scrum Guide gives maximums only for a one-month Sprint. For shorter Sprints it says just that events are "usually shorter", so the pro-rata figures for two-week and one-week Sprints below are a convention, not Guide rules.
| Event | 1-month Sprint (Guide max) | 2-week | 1-week |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sprint Planning | 8 h | 4 h | 2 h |
| Daily Scrum | 15 min | 15 min | 15 min |
| Sprint Review | 4 h | 2 h | 1 h |
| Sprint Retrospective | 3 h | 1.5 h | 45 min |
Cancelling a Sprint
A Sprint can be cut short in only one situation, by only one person. This is Self-test Q15 drawn out.
- Mid-Sprint, the team is working toward its Sprint Goal: two items are Done, two are still in progress.
- A competitor releases a product that makes the Sprint Goal worthless. The goal is now obsolete, which is the only valid reason to cancel.
- Only the Product Owner can cancel a Sprint. Not the Developers, not the Scrum Master, not a manager.
- The Done items are reviewed, since they may still be valuable, and the unfinished items return to the Product Backlog, to be re-ordered with everything else.
- Sprint Planning for a new Sprint follows. (If only part of the work had been affected and the goal still stood, the Developers would instead renegotiate scope with the PO, without cancelling.)
Check yourselfWhich of these are among the five Scrum events? (Select all that apply.)
- The Sprint
- Backlog refinement
- Sprint Retrospective
- Release planning
- Daily Scrum
A, C and E. The five events are the Sprint, Sprint Planning, Daily Scrum, Sprint Review and Sprint Retrospective. Backlog refinement is an ongoing activity, and release planning is not a Scrum Guide event at all. Remember that the Sprint itself counts as an event: it is the container for the other four.
Check yourselfA team runs one-month Sprints. Its Sprint Review regularly lasts a full day (8 hours), and the PO says that's fine because there is so much to show. Is it?
No. For a one-month Sprint the Sprint Review is timeboxed to at most 4 hours, and the Scrum Master is responsible for keeping events within their timebox. If there is too much to discuss, the team should focus the Review as a working session on progress toward the Product Goal and adapting the backlog, not a long presentation.
Check yourselfWhich event concludes the Sprint, and what does it inspect?
The Sprint Retrospective. It inspects individuals, interactions, processes, tools and the Definition of Done, and plans ways to increase quality and effectiveness; improvements can go into the next Sprint Backlog. (The Review comes before it and inspects the product; the Retrospective inspects the way of working.)
Check yourselfDuring a Daily Scrum, the Developers spend the 15 minutes reorganising who will pair with whom tomorrow, and skip the "three questions". Their manager complains this isn't a proper Daily Scrum. Who is right?
The Developers. The Daily Scrum's purpose is to inspect progress toward the Sprint Goal and adapt the plan for the next day; the format is up to the Developers, and the three questions are optional. Re-planning tomorrow's pairing is exactly "adapting the plan".
- Five events: the Sprint (container, ≤ 1 month, fixed, next starts immediately, only the PO cancels), Sprint Planning (why → Sprint Goal, what, how → Sprint Backlog), Daily Scrum (15 min, Developers), Sprint Review (with stakeholders, adapt the backlog), Retrospective (improve; concludes the Sprint).
- One-month timeboxes: 8 h, 15 min, 4 h, 3 h; shorter Sprints are "usually shorter" (pro-rata is a convention).
- Backlog refinement is an activity, not an event.
Artefacts, Commitments and the Definition of Done
Transparency needs something to be transparent about. Scrum's three artefacts are the things anyone can look at to see what is planned, what is in progress and what is finished. Each comes with a commitment, a goal or standard against which progress on that artefact is measured, so that "progress" always means progress toward something.
Three artefacts, three commitments exam
The pairing to remember: Product Backlog ↔ Product Goal, Sprint Backlog ↔ Sprint Goal, Increment ↔ Definition of Done.
Product Backlog
An emergent, ordered list of what is needed to improve the product; the single source of work for the Scrum Team. The PO manages it, although the Developers size the items. The Product Goal is a future state of the product that serves as the long-term objective; the team must fulfil or abandon one Product Goal before taking on the next.Sprint Backlog
The Sprint Goal (why) + the selected items (what) + the plan (how). Made by and for the Developers, who manage it and update it throughout the Sprint. The Sprint Goal is the Sprint's single objective. The goal is fixed, but the work needed to meet it can be negotiated.Increment
An additive, verified, usable step toward the Product Goal. A Sprint can produce several Increments, and they can be released before the Review. The Developers manage it. The Definition of Done is the formal description of the Increment's state when it meets the quality measures.The Definition of Done in practice
The DoD is what stops "done" from meaning "done, except for testing". It comes with a few rules, shown in the figure below.
The W05 slides call the Increment the "potentially shippable increment", meaning the sum of all Done items so far: it could be released if the PO chose to. User stories, acceptance criteria, estimation, velocity and burndown charts are all covered in Part VI.
Scrum documentation: just enough
Agile documents just enough, and the slides list what that includes in Scrum. Most of it lives with the team and changes every Sprint; the last two items exist for people outside the team.
Check yourselfWhich commitment belongs to the Sprint Backlog?
- The Product Goal
- The Definition of Done
- The Sprint Goal
- The velocity forecast
C, the Sprint Goal. The Product Goal belongs to the Product Backlog, and the DoD to the Increment. Velocity is a planning measure (Part VI), not a commitment.
Check yourselfOn the last day of the Sprint, a feature is coded and works on the developer's machine but has not been through the tests the DoD requires. The PO wants to show it at the Review "as a preview". What should happen?
It is undone work: it does not meet the DoD, so it is not part of the Increment, cannot be released and should not even be shown at the Review. It goes back to the Product Backlog, to be re-ordered and finished in a later Sprint.
Check yourselfMid-Sprint, the Developers discover that one selected item is much bigger than expected. The Sprint Goal can still be met without it. What may they do?
Renegotiate the scope of the Sprint Backlog with the PO, for example by dropping or splitting the item. The Sprint Goal is fixed, but the work needed to meet it is negotiable, and the Sprint Backlog is updated throughout the Sprint.
- Artefacts maximise transparency; each has a commitment: Product Backlog ↔ Product Goal, Sprint Backlog ↔ Sprint Goal, Increment ↔ Definition of Done.
- Only work that meets the DoD joins the Increment; undone work is not released or shown and returns to the backlog. The organisational DoD is the minimum; teams on one product share one DoD.
- Scrum documents just enough: backlogs, DoD, stories, acceptance criteria, burndowns, release plans, retrospective notes, plus handover documents and user manuals when someone else maintains the system.
Scrum vs XP vs Kanban
All three frameworks are agile, so the exam rarely asks "which is agile?". It asks which one fits a given situation, and that depends on what kind of thing each one is. This section lines them up so you can choose and justify.
The comparison table exam
The first row is the one to hold on to: Scrum is a management framework, XP is an engineering methodology and Kanban is a flow method. The other rows show how that difference plays out. (Velocity is the amount of work a team completes per Sprint; a burndown chart plots the work remaining; a cumulative flow diagram plots how many items are in each Kanban column over time. Part VI covers the Scrum metrics.)
| Scrum | XP | Kanban | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nature | Management framework; not IT-specific | Software engineering methodology | Flow method for any workflow |
| Cadence | Fixed Sprints of 1 month or less | Weekly iterations, quarterly releases | Continuous flow |
| Roles | PO, Scrum Master, Developers | Customer, Developer, Tracker, Coach | None prescribed |
| Change mid-cycle | Only if the Sprint Goal is not endangered | Customer re-picks stories weekly | Any time capacity allows |
| Limits work by | Sprint forecast / capacity | Weekly capacity, slack | WIP limits |
| Metrics | Velocity, burndown | Velocity, passing tests | Lead time, cycle time, cumulative flow |
| Engineering practices | Not prescribed | Prescribed: pairing, TDD, CI, refactoring | Not prescribed |
| Best for | New products with evolving requirements | Small co-located teams needing high code quality | Support/maintenance; unpredictable incoming work |
The frameworks also combine well. Scrum prescribes no engineering practices, so Scrum teams often adopt XP's (pairing, TDD, CI, refactoring) inside their Sprints. And "Scrumban" puts a Kanban board, with WIP limits, inside Scrum.
…the work is a new product with evolving requirements, you need a management structure (who decides what, when we inspect) and a regular rhythm of stakeholder feedback, and the domain may not even be software. Justify with principles 2 and 3 and the fixed Sprint cadence.
…a small, co-located team needs high code quality on changing requirements, automated testing is possible, and a customer can be on site. Justify with XP's prescribed practices (pairing, TDD, CI, refactoring) and its weekly checkpoints.
…work arrives unpredictably and priorities change daily, as in support and maintenance. Fixed Sprint Goals would fit poorly; a visual board, WIP limits and pull-based flow keep lead time low. Justify with the five fundamentals and lead/cycle time as the metrics.
Check yourselfA start-up is building a brand-new booking product; requirements will change as early customers try it, and the founders want a clear owner for priorities and a regular review with investors. Scrum, XP or Kanban?
Scrum. It is a new product with evolving requirements (Scrum's "best for" row). The PO gives a single owner for priorities, and the Sprint Review gives a regular inspection point with stakeholders such as investors. The team could add XP practices inside the Sprints for code quality.
Check yourselfWhich statements are true? (Select all that apply.)
- Kanban limits work with WIP limits.
- Scrum prescribes test-driven development.
- XP works in weekly iterations with quarterly releases.
- Kanban prescribes a Product Owner.
- Scrum allows mid-Sprint change only if the Sprint Goal is not endangered.
A, C and E. B is false: Scrum prescribes no engineering practices (XP does). D is false: Kanban prescribes no roles.
- Scrum = management framework (fixed Sprints, PO/SM/Developers, velocity); XP = engineering methodology (weekly iterations, prescribed practices); Kanban = flow method (continuous, WIP limits, lead and cycle time, no roles).
- Best for: Scrum, new products with evolving requirements; XP, small co-located teams needing high code quality; Kanban, support and unpredictable work.
- They combine: Scrum + XP practices, and "Scrumban".
Scrum Anti-Patterns and Misconceptions
Many teams say they "do Scrum" while quietly breaking its rules, and exam questions love to describe such a team and ask you to spot the problems. An anti-pattern is a common practice that looks reasonable but undermines the thing it is meant to support. Each one below is followed by its correction.
Ten ways to get Scrum wrong exam
| # | Anti-pattern or misconception wrong | Correction right |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | "The Scrum Master is the team's manager." | The SM is a servant leader who does not assign or appraise work. |
| 2 | "The Daily Scrum is a status report to the PM." | It is the Developers' own planning event. |
| 3 | "Agile means no documentation", or no planning. | The Manifesto's right-hand items are still valued, and agile teams plan continuously. |
| 4 | "Change anything at any time." | Mid-Sprint changes must not endanger the Sprint Goal; new work goes into the Product Backlog instead. |
| 5 | A PO who is a committee, an absent proxy, or has no authority. | The PO must be one person whose decisions the organisation respects. |
| 6 | "Done" without testing, or separate "hardening sprints". | Both amount to mini-waterfall and build technical debt (shortcuts that must be paid back later). Testing belongs in the DoD every Sprint. |
| 7 | Varying Sprint lengths, or skipping the Retrospective or Review. | This is "Scrum-but" ("we do Scrum, but…"), and it is not Scrum. |
| 8 | Using velocity to compare teams or appraise people. | This leads to rushed code and burnout (W05). Velocity is a team's own planning tool. |
| 9 | Treating the Sprint Review as a sign-off gate. | It is a working session that inspects the Increment and adapts the backlog. |
| 10 | "Agile = Scrum", "agile is only for software", "agile fixes problems". | None is true. Agile only exposes problems; people still have to fix them. |
The classic exam version describes a team with several of these at once. The figure draws the one from Self-test Q6 (§3.14); try to name all six problems before reading the list under it.
- The Daily Scrum is the Developers' own planning event, not a status report to a PM.
- Sprints must be fixed and one month or less; Sprints varying up to five weeks break both rules.
- The PO must be one person, not three department heads.
- Testing belongs in the DoD every Sprint. A testing sprint is mini-waterfall and leaves the Increments unusable.
- Mid-Sprint additions endanger the Sprint Goal; they should go to the Product Backlog via the PO.
- Skipping Retrospectives loses adaptation. This is "Scrum-but", and it is not Scrum.
Check yourselfA department head ranks teams by velocity each quarter and gives the "fastest" team a bonus. Which anti-pattern is this, and what is the likely effect?
Anti-pattern 8: using velocity to compare teams or appraise people. Velocity is a team's own planning measure (Part VI), and using it as a league table leads to rushed code and burnout (W05).
Check yourself"Since we adopted Scrum, we've found far more problems than before, so Scrum is making things worse." Evaluate.
Probably false. Agile doesn't fix problems; it exposes them (misconception 10), through transparency and frequent inspection. The problems were most likely there before but invisible until late. The team should now fix them, for example through the Retrospective.
- The SM isn't a manager; the Daily Scrum isn't a status report; agile still documents and plans; change mustn't endanger the Sprint Goal; the PO is one empowered person.
- No untested "Done" or hardening sprints; no varying Sprint lengths or skipped events ("Scrum-but"); no velocity league tables; the Review is a working session.
- Agile ≠ Scrum, isn't only for software, and exposes problems rather than fixing them.
Case Study: PayPal's Agile Transformation
Everything so far describes one Scrum Team. The lecture's PayPal case shows what happens when a whole enterprise, with thousands of people, switches to Scrum at once: why it had to, how it did it, and what it gained. It is examinable, and its best use in an answer is to map each fix back to the agile theory in this Part.
The story, step by step exam
- 2002: eBay acquires PayPal. At this point PayPal is small and nimble.
- By 2008 innovation has slowed, and release cycles have stretched from weeks to many months. Six key drivers are to blame (detailed in the list below).
- The result is widespread organisational frustration: developers see delayed results and conflicting directions; product managers spend more time documenting than building; executives see slow delivery and have low confidence; customers find the experience lagging the industry. PayPal must change to retain customers and talent, and new leadership sponsors a radical transformation.
- 8 May 2013, the "Big Bang": PayPal switches everything at once, against industry wisdom. Over 300 cross-functional teams adopt Scrum with Customer Driven Innovation (CDI); SMs and POs get role-specific training; scaling comes from adapted SAFe (Part XI) and Large-Scale Scrum. The new structure: 17 Product Lines, 31 Sub-Product Lines, 87 Delivery Groups; coaches grow from 4 to 20+.
- Three enablers hold it together: one enterprise sprint cadence (every team on the same two-week sprint, Wednesday to Tuesday), one lifecycle management tool for all teams, and a transformation dashboard to monitor progress.
- Results: leaders focus on product roadmaps; "Team Sprints" replace "Dev Days" as the unit for size estimates; stable teams respond faster to changing priorities; customer insights feed iterative solution concepts instead of static documents. By 2015, 400+ teams are delivering every sprint.
The six drivers of slowdown
- Detailed requirements documents were needed for annual planning. They took months to write and were often outdated before coding began.
- Complex quarterly planning. Technology Quarterly Planning (TQP) added flexibility, but it also added complexity.
- Domain bottlenecks. Organising into 85 domains deepened expertise, but risk, compliance and core payments were needed by nearly every project, so those domains became bottlenecks.
- Developer context switching. Developers were split across several projects, which reduced their productivity.
- Waterfall development. Grass-roots agile teams were forced into waterfall cycles.
- Integration testing. Because code branches were long-lived, even tiny changes needed 6-week integration and regression tests.
Why a Big Bang, and how it was held together
Most organisations roll agile out gradually, team by team. PayPal deliberately did the opposite because its teams were highly interdependent: a gradual rollout would leave new agile teams blocked waiting on old waterfall ones. It also needed an enterprise framework for staffing, delivery and governance quickly.
Enterprise sprint cadence. Before, sprint practices and lengths varied from team to team, which made cross-team ceremonies hard. Afterwards every team ran the same two-week sprint. Short cycles avoid mini-waterfalls and keep the focus on user stories. Sprints ran Wednesday to Tuesday, so that teams in different countries could all take part in ceremonies, and sprint numbers became the shorthand for dependencies and deliveries.
Lifecycle management tool. Tracking approaches had also varied. PayPal evaluated agile tools and picked one tool for all teams, with an enterprise vendor partnership. The tool was aligned to the cadence and the product structure, so each team had its own backlog but could also see other teams' plans and track dependencies. Training and coaching were provided. Progress was monitored with a transformation dashboard tracking co-location, team size, SM/PO support and each sprint's Say/Do ratio (how much of what a team said it would deliver it actually did).
The shifts, the challenges and the results
| From (what was) | To (what will be) |
|---|---|
| Project driven | Product aligned |
| Waterfall | PayPal Agile |
| Feature-oriented requirements | Customer-driven solutions |
| Project-based planning | Planning by team, group and product |
| People assigned to projects | Stable teams aligned to product |
| 15 dedicated teams | Delivery teams and delivery groups |
| Phases and phase exits | Roadmaps, release plans and sprints |
The rollout faced real challenges. Employees had to adapt to large-scale change, and the new structures had to be communicated. Some teams had no agile experience, while others had their "own brand" of agile (for example 3-week sprints) and resisted the standard. Support came through videos, training and feedback channels. The results are in the last step of the stepper above.
Exam angle: map each fix to agile theory
The risks of switching everything at once were disruption, resistance (for example from teams with their own agile variants) and uneven maturity across teams. They were mitigated by executive sponsorship, coaching, one tool and the transformation dashboard. An answer that names the risks and the mitigations scores better than one that only praises the result.
Check yourselfWhich statements about PayPal's transformation are correct? (Select all that apply.)
- It rolled Scrum out gradually, one product line at a time.
- Every team ran the same two-week sprint, Wednesday to Tuesday.
- Over 300 cross-functional teams were formed.
- Each team chose its own lifecycle tool.
- Scaling came from adapted SAFe and Large-Scale Scrum.
B, C and E. A is wrong: it was a deliberate "Big Bang" on 8 May 2013, against industry wisdom. D is wrong: PayPal picked one tool for all teams.
Check yourselfA PayPal-style organisation has one team insisting on 3-week sprints because "that's how we do agile". Using the case, explain why the enterprise standard matters more.
With a common cadence, sprint numbers mean the same dates for every team, so cross-team ceremonies line up and dependencies can be tracked by sprint number. A team on 3-week sprints breaks that alignment, so other teams can't plan around its deliveries. PayPal met exactly this resistance ("own brand" agile) and handled it with training, videos and feedback channels, while keeping the two-week standard.
- By 2008 PayPal had slowed from weeks to months because of six drivers: requirements documents, quarterly planning, 85-domain bottlenecks, context switching, forced waterfall, 6-week integration testing.
- On 8 May 2013 it switched in a Big Bang: 300+ cross-functional Scrum teams with CDI, SAFe/LeSS scaling, 17/31/87 structure, one two-week Wed–Tue cadence, one tool, a dashboard. By 2015, 400+ teams delivered every sprint.
- In the exam, map each fix to agile theory, and name the Big Bang's risks (disruption, resistance, uneven maturity) and mitigations.
Applying It to the Medic Case
The tutorials' running case asks the question every case-study exam question asks: given these facts, would Scrum work here, and how would you set it up? This section weighs the facts and builds the Scrum Team.
BYTE Consulting is building a surgical training simulator for the hospital RVEEH, so that trainee surgeons can practise cochlear-implant and temporal-bone surgery without scarce cadavers. The simulator shows a 3D stereoscopic model of the bone and gives haptic feedback (force felt through the drilling tool). BYTE's team of about 12 engineers doesn't know C++, stereoscopic rendering or haptics, and the hardware is new. On the client side are the CMO Tom Hanks and the CTO Jane Smith, two surgeons, Fatemeh Hashemi and Craig McMillan (whom an addendum makes available day to day), and the trainees. After handover, Mengyao Li's RVEEH IT support team will maintain the system. Medical indemnifiers also have a stake.
Would Scrum suit Medic?
- Two sets of facts from the case are about to go on the scales. Remember van Lamsweerde: agility is not binary, so the answer can be "Scrum, adjusted".
- For Scrum. Nobody can specify up front how drilling force should feel, or what a "minimalistic, non-intrusive" UI looks like, so surgeons must try increments at Sprint Reviews (principles 2 and 3). Technical risk is high, so short Sprints and early spikes (small experiments, e.g. proving haptic feedback in Sprint 1) expose it early. About 12 engineers fit two Scrum teams. And the addendum makes Fatemeh Hashemi and Craig McMillan available day to day, satisfying the "user available" assumption that the original "busy doctors" constraint violated.
- Against Scrum. Strict reliability and performance NFRs break assumption 4; many stakeholders (surgeons, trainees, RVEEH IT, management, indemnifiers) break assumption 1; RVEEH's support team, not the developers, will maintain the system, breaking assumption 8. The developers are inexperienced, so self-management is harder, and hardware integration needs up-front architecture.
- Verdict: Scrum, adapted (a hybrid). Each adaptation answers an "against" fact: up-front architecture and NFR targets (hardware, NFRs), performance and haptic-latency tests in the DoD (NFRs), and handover documentation and user manuals (maintenance by RVEEH).
Part II's Medic analysis recommends the spiral model. That analysis assumes the original case's busy surgeons, whereas this one relies on the addendum's day-to-day surgeon availability. Either answer earns marks if it is justified from the case facts you state. What loses marks is a recommendation with no facts behind it.
The Medic Scrum Team
Check yourselfThe Medic CMO, Tom Hanks, offers to be Product Owner together with CTO Jane Smith, "so that both clinical and technical views are represented". Respond.
Decline politely. The PO must be one person, not a committee, and must have time to work with the team daily; both executives are too busy. A better PO is Fatemeh Hashemi, an empowered client-side domain expert with authority delegated by the CMO. Hanks and Smith remain key stakeholders who attend Sprint Reviews and influence the backlog through the PO.
Check yourselfGive two Medic-specific items you would add to the Definition of Done, and say which case fact each answers.
Performance tests and haptic-latency tests must pass, answering the strict reliability and performance NFRs (agile assumption 4 is broken, so quality can't be left implicit). The guide's adaptations also call for handover documentation and user manuals to be kept up to date, answering the fact that RVEEH IT, not BYTE, will maintain the system (assumption 8).
- For Scrum: discovered requirements (haptics, UI), high technical risk, ~12 engineers, surgeons available daily. Against: strict NFRs (#4), many stakeholders (#1), RVEEH maintains it (#8), inexperienced team, hardware needs architecture.
- Verdict: Scrum, adapted (hybrid): up-front architecture and NFR targets, performance and haptic-latency tests in the DoD, handover documents and manuals. Spiral (Part II) also earns marks if justified.
- PO Fatemeh Hashemi; SM an experienced BYTE servant leader; two teams of ≤ 10 sharing one PO, backlog, Product Goal and DoD; Hanks, Smith, Mengyao Li's team and trainees are stakeholders.
Self-Test: Likely Exam Questions
These fifteen questions are the guide's self-test for this topic, with its model answers (the guide's own, not official staff answers). Try each one on paper before opening it; for the longer ones, aim for the structure of the model answer rather than its exact words.
Short-answer questions on this topic reward naming the exact item (the value, the principle, the event, the commitment) and then explaining or applying it. Case questions ("would Scrum suit…?") reward a clear verdict justified with facts from the case on both sides, and an adaptation for each fact against.
Q1State the four Agile Manifesto values. What does "over" mean?
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. Working software over comprehensive documentation. Customer collaboration over contract negotiation. Responding to change over following a plan.
"Over" is about priority: the right-hand items still have value, but the left-hand items are valued more.
Q2Explain four agile principles, each with a practice that realises it.
Any four of these pairs:
- Frequent delivery, preferring shorter timescales → Sprints of 1 month or less.
- Welcoming changing requirements → re-ordering the backlog every Sprint.
- Sustainable pace → XP's 40-hour week.
- Regular reflection → the Retrospective.
- Simplicity → YAGNI.
- Business people and developers working together daily → the PO / on-site customer.
Q3Explain Scrum's three pillars, how Scrum supports each, and Scrum's artefacts and their commitments.
Transparency: the work is visible to those doing it and those receiving it; supported by the artefacts. Inspection: frequent checks of the artefacts and of progress; supported by the five events. Adaptation: adjusting as soon as possible; supported by self-management.
Artefacts and commitments: Product Backlog → Product Goal (PO); Sprint Backlog → Sprint Goal (Developers); Increment → Definition of Done.
Q4Give Scrum timeboxes for a one-month Sprint and typical values for a two-week Sprint.
The Sprint itself is at most 1 month long (2 weeks in the shorter case). One-month values, with typical two-week values in brackets: Sprint Planning 8 h (4 h), Daily Scrum 15 min (15 min), Sprint Review 4 h (2 h), Sprint Retrospective 3 h (1.5 h). For shorter Sprints the Guide says only "usually shorter".
Q5Compare a Scrum Master with a traditional project manager.
A traditional PM works by command and control: plans, assigns tasks and tracks baselines, and is accountable for scope, time and cost. An SM is a servant leader: establishes Scrum, coaches self-management, removes impediments, facilitates events and protects the team, but does not assign work or own the plan. In Scrum, the PM's duties are spread across the PO (value), the Developers (plan) and the SM.
Q6A team "doing Scrum" has these practices: a PM holds a daily meeting where developers report to him; Sprints vary from 2 to 5 weeks; three department heads jointly act as PO; every third Sprint is a testing sprint; managers add urgent work mid-Sprint; Retrospectives are skipped when the team is busy. Identify the problems.
- The Daily Scrum is the Developers' own planning event, not a status report to a PM.
- Sprints must be fixed and 1 month or less; Sprints that vary up to five weeks break both rules.
- The PO must be one person, not three department heads.
- Testing belongs in the DoD every Sprint. A testing sprint is a mini-waterfall, and it leaves the Increments unusable.
- Mid-Sprint additions endanger the Sprint Goal, so they should go to the backlog via the PO.
- Skipping Retrospectives loses adaptation. This is "Scrum-but", and it is not Scrum.
(Drawn in §3.11.)
Q7An IT help desk receives unpredictable support tickets. Scrum, XP or Kanban?
Kanban. Work arrives continuously and priorities change daily, so fixed Sprint Goals fit poorly. A board visualises the tickets, and WIP limits stop multitasking and expose bottlenecks. Pull-based flow minimises lead time, which is the right metric here, along with cycle time.
Q8Why does van Lamsweerde consider agile unsuitable for air-traffic-control software, and how can agility be adjusted?
Air-traffic-control software violates the agile assumptions: it is safety-critical, with strict NFRs and risks; it has many stakeholders who cannot be reduced to one role; verification before coding matters more than early release; and documentation is needed for certification and maintenance.
Agility can still be adjusted, because it is not binary. The team can do more up-front elicitation, specification and verification for the critical parts, and iterate on the non-critical parts, such as the UI.
Q9Recommend an SDLC for (a) a fitness app whose features will evolve from user feedback, (b) a bookstore system with exactly known requirements, (c) a public-records system whose stakeholders want to see it first.
(a) Scrum, because emerging requirements need frequent increments and feedback. (b) Waterfall, because the requirements are stable and known. (c) Prototyping to elicit requirements, followed by a formal or incremental build.
Q10"Agile teams don't write documentation." Evaluate.
False. The Manifesto values working software over documentation, which means documentation is still valued. Scrum produces backlogs, a DoD, user stories, acceptance criteria, burndown charts, release plans, retrospective notes, handover documents and user manuals. The difference is that these are just enough and kept current. They are essential when another team maintains the system.
Q11Compare Scrum and XP.
Scrum is a management framework: accountabilities, events, artefacts and Sprints of 1 month or less, with no engineering practices, and not IT-specific. XP is a software engineering methodology: weekly cycles, the values communication, simplicity, feedback, courage and respect, and prescribed practices (pairing, TDD, CI, refactoring, on-site customer, sustainable pace). The two are complementary, and Scrum teams often adopt XP practices.
Q12List PayPal's drivers of slowdown and how the transformation addressed each.
- Requirements documents for annual planning, outdated before coding → a backlog and just-in-time stories.
- Complex quarterly planning → roadmaps plus two-week sprint planning.
- 85-domain bottlenecks → cross-functional teams.
- Context switching → stable, product-aligned teams.
- Waterfall coordination → Scrum with a common cadence and SAFe/LeSS.
- 6-week integration testing → continuous integration.
Q13Why did PayPal choose a "Big Bang" and a single sprint cadence? What were the risks?
Big Bang: its teams were highly interdependent, so a gradual rollout would leave agile teams blocked by waterfall ones; it also needed an enterprise framework for staffing, delivery and governance fast.
Common cadence: a two-week sprint, Wednesday to Tuesday, enables cross-team, cross-country planning and dependency tracking by sprint number, and its short length avoids mini-waterfalls.
Risks: disruption, resistance from teams with their own agile variants, and uneven experience. Mitigated by sponsorship, coaches, training, one tool and a dashboard.
Q14Would Scrum suit the Medic project? What would the roles be?
Yes, adapted. Haptic and UI requirements emerge through feedback, technical risk is high (C++, haptics, 3D), the team size fits, and the liaison surgeons are available daily.
However, the NFRs are critical, there are many stakeholders and RVEEH IT will maintain the system, so add up-front architecture and NFR work, a strict DoD and handover documentation.
Roles: PO one empowered surgeon (e.g. Fatemeh Hashemi); SM an experienced servant leader; Developers the engineers, architects and testers, in two teams of 10 or fewer sharing one backlog, PO and DoD.
Q15Mid-Sprint, a competitor's release makes the Sprint Goal worthless. What happens, and who decides?
Only the Product Owner can cancel a Sprint, and only because its goal is obsolete. The Done items are reviewed, unfinished items return to the Product Backlog, and Sprint Planning for a new Sprint follows.
If only part of the work is affected and the goal still stands, the Developers renegotiate scope with the PO instead of cancelling. (Stepped through in §3.8.)
- Know the counted lists cold: 4 values, 12 principles, 3 pillars, 5 Scrum values, 3 accountabilities, 5 events, 3 artefacts with 3 commitments, XP's 5 values, Kanban's 5 fundamentals.
- For case questions, give a verdict, justify it with case facts on both sides, and adapt for each fact against (agility is not binary).
- Next: Part IV covers risk management, including how agile handles risk; Part VI covers the planning tools Scrum teams use.