Paul ParkerScrumMaster (CSM)| PricewaterhouseCoopers (formally BearingPoint)Tampa, Fl, United States
Retrospective - Looking backward; contemplating things past; -- opposed to prospective; as, a retrospective view.
One of Scrum’s strengths is the Retrospective at the end of each Sprint. It provides the team time to reflect on the completed Sprint. The team examines processes and practices that worked for the team and those that did not. It is a chance for the team to promote those “good” processes and practices in future Sprints and take corrective action for the “bad.”
Postmortem - An evaluation or discussion occurring after the end or fact of something.
At the end of a Waterfall project, the team does a postmortem to document processes and practices that worked and those that needed improvement. Lessons Learned are created and available for future projects.
Retrospectives allow project teams to make course corrections throughout the project, applying successful processes and practices through the end of the project. They are timely and meaningful for the project team. Postmortems are after the fact and do not provide course corrections for the current project. What are your thoughts?
Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Mark Stewart PMPProject Manager| Weis marketsWarminster, Pa, United States
I don't look at this as an either/or proposition because, in practice, you should really be using both approaches in your project. I don't believe in a one-size-fits-all approach to projects; situation always dictates what you should do which requires you to be nible, and always expect change.
Replace the word "Sprint" with the word "Phase" and now you've combined the best of Scrum with Waterfall. Saving Changes...
Hans RobbersSenior Director| SalesforceVlissingen, Netherlands
I agree with Mark. The objective of retrospectives is to optimise your project. The objective of the post mortem is to share your best practices with other projects and your fellow project managers. Both serve their purpose and are equally important Saving Changes...
Paul ParkerScrumMaster (CSM)| PricewaterhouseCoopers (formally BearingPoint)Tampa, Fl, United States
The problem I've encountered with postmortems is that the team creates a report to get the check in the box that the task was completed. Most organizations I've worked with rarely read those reports when starting new projects and after a period the information is stale. Saving Changes...
Jaime TaylorSenior Project Manager| Navitor Inc.Saint Peter, Mn, United States
Mark hit it on the head with not an either/or proposition. Postmortems are useful but not sufficient on their own as Paul and Hans point out. Retrospectives are used for a different purpose that directly impacts next steps/iteration. Saving Changes...
Deborah BollesPMO Manager| HealthesystemsTarpon Springs, Fl, United States
I have found that over time, with the same core team members, any approach you use will need some variation in execution for the team to continue to be engaged.
For teams adopting scrum, it is important to reflect and adjust as folks learn the process and iterations shorten.
A variation I like to use is to have the team members identify the top 2 or 3 "things" that most significantly affected the outcome of the sprint. These are generally a combination of good and bad things. If everyone can identify one thing to celebrate and one thing to improve on, there is a good balance in the discussion.
I think it is important to avoid forms and templates and instead talk face to face. The place for documentation is for capturing the highest priority actionable items the team wants to address in upcoming sprints. Get those into the backlog or the sprint objectives.
Saving Changes...
David TannenProject Manager| FHL Bank of TopekaSaint Paul, Mn, United States
The Scrum Masters get together every couple of months and bring together our retrospective results and talk about our retrospectives. The goal is look for systematic problems or emerging trends for the project teams. Saving Changes...
