Hi PM Community. I am learning about Scrum and have understood that they are self organized teams that would be with respect to the work or product. Who manages the resource management aspects? Like performance appraisal, recognition, team location, and other human resource things which are usually a manager's responsibility. Are Scrum teams functionally aligned to a project manager? Please let me know your thoughts. Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
Scrum is a frarmework. It does not prescribe, it does not said "the how". You can fill it up (and you must) with "the how" that best fits for your organization taking into account your actual enteprise architecture. Saving Changes...
Team members are still going to have functional/people managers who are outside of the delivery team who would handle HR responsibilities. However, evaluation of the individual should include feedback from the team they work with.
There have been many threads in this community about the role of a PM in agile delivery - it's still needed, except the focus is more on the work done between the sub-teams and the interactions with stakeholders than with the day-to-day of the sub-teams themselves.
Kiron
...
1 reply by Adrian Carlogea
Jun 16, 2018 9:50 AM
Adrian Carlogea
...
"There have been many threads in this community about the role of a PM in agile delivery - it's still needed"
This comes even more against the idea of self-managed teams.
In a non-agile project you usually have a project manager that manages the project without necessarily getting into the technical details and one or more leads that manage the technical details and the team members in their functional area(s).
I am not sure about other agile methodologies but if we keep the PM in Scrum and we add the Scrum Master and the Product Owner it basically means that in order to have self-managed teams you need to add more people to manage them. Not to mention that the leads continue to exist in Scrum too and they are very powerful in imposing technical decisions.
And on top of all that we have the functional managers that of course don't give up their decision power. At one place where I worked a couple of years ago the functional manager was present at all the daily scrum meetings.
Saving Changes...
Eliani RamosVice President| PMI-SCJoinville, Sc, Brazil
Even in Agile Culture people need a Leader! Self organized teams can manage their work alone, their deliverables, but they still need a leader to solve some conflicts, to direct the team, to give feedbacks, etc. We asigned coordinators to manage agile teams directly and one manager to all agile teams (squads from spotify model). These coordinators are servant leaders and we are always doing changes according the moment of the team. In some moment team needs a kind of leader. When this team grow they could needs other kind of leader. Have a team of servant leaders is a good way to structure the leadership.
This team of leaders will pass through all the teams and support in their growth.
Our high performance teams started using kanban instead of scrum. Saving Changes...
There is no such thing as self-organized or self-managed teams. When a team has a leader it can no longer be self-managed. Managed self-manged teams is a contradiction in terms.
Scrum usually does not change the structure of the organization so employees working on Scrum teams are also members of functional departments and they report to functional managers. It is these functional managers the ones who actually manage the people that are working on Scrum teams and they also do performance appraisals.
Project managers don't have formal, direct authority not even in "traditional" projects. Saving Changes...
Team members are still going to have functional/people managers who are outside of the delivery team who would handle HR responsibilities. However, evaluation of the individual should include feedback from the team they work with.
There have been many threads in this community about the role of a PM in agile delivery - it's still needed, except the focus is more on the work done between the sub-teams and the interactions with stakeholders than with the day-to-day of the sub-teams themselves.
Kiron
"There have been many threads in this community about the role of a PM in agile delivery - it's still needed"
This comes even more against the idea of self-managed teams.
In a non-agile project you usually have a project manager that manages the project without necessarily getting into the technical details and one or more leads that manage the technical details and the team members in their functional area(s).
I am not sure about other agile methodologies but if we keep the PM in Scrum and we add the Scrum Master and the Product Owner it basically means that in order to have self-managed teams you need to add more people to manage them. Not to mention that the leads continue to exist in Scrum too and they are very powerful in imposing technical decisions.
And on top of all that we have the functional managers that of course don't give up their decision power. At one place where I worked a couple of years ago the functional manager was present at all the daily scrum meetings.
...
1 reply by Kiron Bondale
Jun 17, 2018 4:15 PM
Kiron Bondale
...
Adrian -
As soon as the complexity of a given project increases past a certain point due to number of stakeholders, control partners, or other factors, a PM is needed to help stick handle these external interactions so that a Scrum Master can stay focused on the agile teams.
Most scaled agile frameworks recognize the need for coordination above the role of the SM whether they call that role a PM or not.
"There have been many threads in this community about the role of a PM in agile delivery - it's still needed"
This comes even more against the idea of self-managed teams.
In a non-agile project you usually have a project manager that manages the project without necessarily getting into the technical details and one or more leads that manage the technical details and the team members in their functional area(s).
I am not sure about other agile methodologies but if we keep the PM in Scrum and we add the Scrum Master and the Product Owner it basically means that in order to have self-managed teams you need to add more people to manage them. Not to mention that the leads continue to exist in Scrum too and they are very powerful in imposing technical decisions.
And on top of all that we have the functional managers that of course don't give up their decision power. At one place where I worked a couple of years ago the functional manager was present at all the daily scrum meetings.
Adrian -
As soon as the complexity of a given project increases past a certain point due to number of stakeholders, control partners, or other factors, a PM is needed to help stick handle these external interactions so that a Scrum Master can stay focused on the agile teams.
Most scaled agile frameworks recognize the need for coordination above the role of the SM whether they call that role a PM or not.
...
1 reply by Adrian Carlogea
Jun 18, 2018 5:29 PM
Adrian Carlogea
...
Thank you for your message Kiron. I don't disagree with you, PMs may be needed in Agile projects as well.
My problem however is that a methodology that theoretically is supposed to work with self-managed teams in reality requires more people to do the management.
In a non-agile project you have a PM that among other things manages the process and the scope and one or more leads that manage the technical details as well as the people that are doing the work on the project.
In SCRUM some of the duties of a PM from a non-Agile project are performed by the Scrum Master and the Product Owner. The Scrum Master manages some aspects related to the process while the Product Owner manages the scope. The PM, when exists, does the remaining PM work. The technical leads as well as the functional managers continue to exist and they do manage (in their functional ares) the people that are doing the work on the project.
It's funny but it appears that self-managed team are managed by more people than the team that are supposed to be managed. :P
As soon as the complexity of a given project increases past a certain point due to number of stakeholders, control partners, or other factors, a PM is needed to help stick handle these external interactions so that a Scrum Master can stay focused on the agile teams.
Most scaled agile frameworks recognize the need for coordination above the role of the SM whether they call that role a PM or not.
Thank you for your message Kiron. I don't disagree with you, PMs may be needed in Agile projects as well.
My problem however is that a methodology that theoretically is supposed to work with self-managed teams in reality requires more people to do the management.
In a non-agile project you have a PM that among other things manages the process and the scope and one or more leads that manage the technical details as well as the people that are doing the work on the project.
In SCRUM some of the duties of a PM from a non-Agile project are performed by the Scrum Master and the Product Owner. The Scrum Master manages some aspects related to the process while the Product Owner manages the scope. The PM, when exists, does the remaining PM work. The technical leads as well as the functional managers continue to exist and they do manage (in their functional ares) the people that are doing the work on the project.
It's funny but it appears that self-managed team are managed by more people than the team that are supposed to be managed. :P
...
1 reply by Kiron Bondale
Jun 19, 2018 7:15 AM
Kiron Bondale
...
Adrian -
You are absolutely correct - I have found that there is often a LOT of external management happening for so-called self-managed teams! This is not agile, but it is unfortunately the reality!
Thank you for your message Kiron. I don't disagree with you, PMs may be needed in Agile projects as well.
My problem however is that a methodology that theoretically is supposed to work with self-managed teams in reality requires more people to do the management.
In a non-agile project you have a PM that among other things manages the process and the scope and one or more leads that manage the technical details as well as the people that are doing the work on the project.
In SCRUM some of the duties of a PM from a non-Agile project are performed by the Scrum Master and the Product Owner. The Scrum Master manages some aspects related to the process while the Product Owner manages the scope. The PM, when exists, does the remaining PM work. The technical leads as well as the functional managers continue to exist and they do manage (in their functional ares) the people that are doing the work on the project.
It's funny but it appears that self-managed team are managed by more people than the team that are supposed to be managed. :P
Adrian -
You are absolutely correct - I have found that there is often a LOT of external management happening for so-called self-managed teams! This is not agile, but it is unfortunately the reality!
Kiron
...
1 reply by DILEEP KUMAR RAROTH
Jun 19, 2018 9:41 AM
DILEEP KUMAR RAROTH
...
Kiron,
The very reason behind the demand of having an external management for the so-salled "self managed teams" is the lack of a written guideline in their area of interest. The group is formed with a common goal ; means there should be a set of well described guidline that need to be clearly understood and followed by each individual. There need to have group discussions among the team so that all are clear about their responsibilities and the level of management that need to be self-imposed.
If this is not happening in the initial stages of the team formation, one can not rule out the chances of conflicts, atleast in the individual approaches.
Community Champion
