I don’t hide the fact that, given the choice, I’d rather have my feet swapped out for frying pans, than have to use Agile “management” tools. I make it clear to the teams I serve that nothing really beats what we’re finely tuned to be good at: face to face encounters. I keep away from software tools when it comes to working within the Scrum framework.
This resentment began, I think, when I was introduced to Jira. (My recall is foggy because my brain has put a lot of effort into erasing that moment.)
I was in the throes of becoming a Scrum Master, and was feeling particularly excited about the prospect of using big whiteboards and PostIt notes and marker pens and magnets. In fact, I may already have started using them. I’m not sure.The company I was employed by was rolling out Jira as a means of not only tracking defects but, God forbid, sprints.
No matter how hard I tried, at least one team refused to move to a physical board. It was a team of three, and they sat next to each other no more than 1m apart. Yet they insisted on using Jira to keep themselves updated. And just half a metre from them was a shiny new whiteboard on wheels, ready to be drafted into action at the drop of a hat. I’ve no doubt they probably used Google Talk to chat to each other too.
“Individuals and interactions over processes and tools.”
Tool usage in itself may not be a problem, but the tools themselves restrict us. For example, in the same company, the Product Owner wanted to see how the team was doing with her stories. For the aforementioned renegades, we had to arrange a Jira login ID (but we’d run out of users so had to boot someone off to make room for her) and then train her in how to use the tool. I’m not convinced we’d bought into Scrum’s “information radiator” ethics. Information coolers, more like.
But the issues aren’t just around visibility. I’ve used other Scrum tools that absolutely insist upon the users entering estimates against stories. But if you’re working with a team that has moved beyond estimation, the tool becomes unusable. The workaround? Type in any number against the estimate. This is fine for the developers, but I had one case where the stakeholders also had access to the same software and they raised concerns about the velocity of the team. The software told them that the team was going to be late on delivery based on the numbers they’d punched in. I’ll repeat that. The software told them. Not the team. Not the Scrum Master. But some software.
Physical boards give you the freedom to modify your way of working without waiting for a change request to go through to a team of open source developers spread across the globe. For example, I’ve recently been using Taiga. It’s a great looking bit of software and really easy to use. But hold on, what happens when you want to close a sprint? Well, normally, you’d make a note of the stories that didn’t reach Done, maybe note also the ratio of stories Done vs not Done, and close the sprint. But Taiga operates on the policy that a sprint closes when all the stories are Done. Until then, the sprint can’t be closed. OK, so I’d love my teams to get all their stories to Done. But in reality, this doesn’t always happen In fact, Scrum works on priorities, so sometimes you half expect the stories near the bottom of the sprint to not get finished. C’est la vie. Taiga, instead, operates on the fallacy that teams will get all their stories to Done. Always. The solution? At the end of the sprint, you have to move all off the not-Done stories out of the sprint and back into the backlog. The sprint then closes. Oh, but now the tool will tell you that you completed 100% of your stories in that sprint, which was zero. Gah!
Recently, I’ve found myself acting as Scrum Master for a team that’s located about 200 miles from me. I’m using agile management tools. It makes me feel a little dirty, but the team is getting some use from them. We were using Taiga (see above) with some manual note taking thrown in to cater for its restrictions. I can live with that for a while. But what about retrospectives? This is an area that I really enjoying indulging in. But that’s when I’m in the same room as the team, reading emotions, watching body language and, in many cases, veering wildly off course to cater for something crazy that pops up during the exercise. With a team that’s 200 miles away, I had to revert to tool usage again. I scoured the web for a cloud-based retrospective tool. I found some. I tried one for two retrospectives. It worked. But boy, by the end of each retrospective I was exhausted! Why? Because I had imagine the feeling of the remote room; I had to work hard to listen over VoIP to gauge the sentiment of the team. It was very very hard work. The tool allowed us to type things within certain columns (like Mad, Sad, Glad) but what was missing was that human touch. The unsaid.
I don’t blame the tool for this; it was making a good job of a less than desirable situation. But boy would I have preferred to be there, in the thick of it.
So, I’m no tool playa. I’m a hata. Word.