I'm new to Agile. But so far what I have learned from Agile Practice Guide, a better choice for the following practice question seems to be (b). But this choice also gives an impression that you are forcing the Product Owner (the boss/owner of the entire project) to accept a task the way you (the Scrum Master) want it done - that seems against the spirit of Agile metrology. Is (b) still a better choice here?
You are a scrum master in an agile team. There are seven stories created for a product to be developed. The product owner doesn't want to prioritize items in the product backlog that need to be added to the story. He says everything is important. What is the best you can do?
(a) Allow the team to work without prioritizing. It is not a critical problem.
(b) Be firm and insist on prioritizing.
(c) Prioritize the product backlog yourself.
(d) Ask the team to decide which features are important. Saving Changes...
B would be the best choice here. When a PO role exists, one of the key accountabilities for that role is prioritization of the backlog of work for the team.
A is incorrect as the team might not know what is most important for the various stakeholders of the product.
C is incorrect as that is not part of the role of an SM unless the SM is also wearing the PO hat.
D is the same as A.
The PO is NOT the boss/owner of the project. The sponsor and/or customer are. The PO is there to represent the voice of the various stakeholders. Asking the PO to do their job is not "forcing" them - if they are unwilling to do their job, that issue needs to be resolved, either by coaching them, or by escalating the issue to someone who can resolve it (e.g. by replacing the PO).
Kiron
...
1 reply by Raz Sid
Feb 11, 2021 10:39 AM
Raz Sid
...
Good explanation for why the other choices may/should not be a good choice. I thought PO is also a project owner - but now I know that is not the case. I do agree with user "OZAVIZE LAWANI" that "Be firm and insist" suggests forcing - that I think is against the team spirit of Agile Methodology.
Hi there. I would flip it on it's head a bit. Instead of thinking of it like 'forcing' the PO to choice, perhaps consider that you're helping him/her clarify his business' most pressing problems. So for example, the PO says he wants everything, but which item will give the most business value? As an example, he wants a new report, he wants the flexibility to schedule the report automatically or to generate it ad hoc, and he wants it output in 3 file formats and sent to 6 different teams. Probing further might reveal that 2 of the 6 recipients have the most pressing need, and each requires a different format, but have no need to run the reports on an ad hoc basis. Therefore you might prioritize delivering the report in the needed formats first, and then ensure that it can be scheduled to generate automatically. Present the information to the PO in this way and it will feel less like 'forcing' and more like 'helping' Peeling the onion in this way will help point both you and the PO towards the priorities.
One other thing: it's possible the real unspoken concern is that if he prioritizes some items, the others won't be delivered. In which case you need to flex your relationship management muscles (and work hard to deliver to plan). "Be firm and insist" suggests forcing. In reality you're most likely negotiating and and working to reduce conflict and improve collaboration. :-)
...
1 reply by Raz Sid
Feb 11, 2021 10:43 AM
Raz Sid
...
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I agree with many of your points. Also please see my response to user Kiron.
The question is not very clear about some things but I would say that (a) is the best answer. The point of prioritisation in Scrum is purely to allow the team to select items for a sprint. Items do not need to be prioritised within a sprint and it's up to the PO if he wants to prioritise them in advance.
When the PO attends sprint planning he doesn't have to prioritise if he's willing to say which items he wants in the current sprint. If he disagrees with the team's *estimates* then that's a different matter. If the content of the sprint can't be resolved by discussion then one possibility is to suggest a shorter sprint instead: measure the velocity after one week instead of two or three and then the team has some evidence to base their forecasts on. Saving Changes...
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
B makes the most sense to me from all the given answers. If after you do so, things are not resolved then you can inform the scrum master who can help resolving this impediment. Saving Changes...
B would be the best choice here. When a PO role exists, one of the key accountabilities for that role is prioritization of the backlog of work for the team.
A is incorrect as the team might not know what is most important for the various stakeholders of the product.
C is incorrect as that is not part of the role of an SM unless the SM is also wearing the PO hat.
D is the same as A.
The PO is NOT the boss/owner of the project. The sponsor and/or customer are. The PO is there to represent the voice of the various stakeholders. Asking the PO to do their job is not "forcing" them - if they are unwilling to do their job, that issue needs to be resolved, either by coaching them, or by escalating the issue to someone who can resolve it (e.g. by replacing the PO).
Kiron
Good explanation for why the other choices may/should not be a good choice. I thought PO is also a project owner - but now I know that is not the case. I do agree with user "OZAVIZE LAWANI" that "Be firm and insist" suggests forcing - that I think is against the team spirit of Agile Methodology. Saving Changes...
Hi there. I would flip it on it's head a bit. Instead of thinking of it like 'forcing' the PO to choice, perhaps consider that you're helping him/her clarify his business' most pressing problems. So for example, the PO says he wants everything, but which item will give the most business value? As an example, he wants a new report, he wants the flexibility to schedule the report automatically or to generate it ad hoc, and he wants it output in 3 file formats and sent to 6 different teams. Probing further might reveal that 2 of the 6 recipients have the most pressing need, and each requires a different format, but have no need to run the reports on an ad hoc basis. Therefore you might prioritize delivering the report in the needed formats first, and then ensure that it can be scheduled to generate automatically. Present the information to the PO in this way and it will feel less like 'forcing' and more like 'helping' Peeling the onion in this way will help point both you and the PO towards the priorities.
One other thing: it's possible the real unspoken concern is that if he prioritizes some items, the others won't be delivered. In which case you need to flex your relationship management muscles (and work hard to deliver to plan). "Be firm and insist" suggests forcing. In reality you're most likely negotiating and and working to reduce conflict and improve collaboration. :-)
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I agree with many of your points. Also please see my response to user Kiron. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
