Skip to main content

Managing Scrum: Traditional Project Management Software

From the moment I started working with Scrum until I wrote the quick poll on agile tool usage, it never even occurred to me to consider using classical project management tools like Microsoft Project. Why not?

Just as Neo knows that there is no spoon, and managers need to learn that there is no box, agile project managers know that there is no critical path. The world view, basic concepts and individual responsibilities in a Scrum environment are different and so the needs of the underlying software are different as well.

The Product Owner negotiates with the team on the basis of functionality to be realized, not in terms of tasks to be accomplished. The Scrum master eliminates impediments and helps assure that everyone is working on the highest priority stories in the current Sprint. The team members look to the task board to know what to do, to inform their colleagues of what they are doing, and to update their status and their estimates daily. The state of the project is visible for all to see at every step of the way.

What does classical PM software do? According to Wikipedia, the purpose of project management software is to:
  1. Schedule a series of events,
  2. Mangage dependencies between events
  3. Schedule people and resources
  4. Deal with uncertainties in the estimates of the duration of each task
  5. Arrange tasks to meet various deadlines
  6. Calculate critical paths
  7. Reporting
Do these functions correspond to the needs of an Agile Team? There is no critical path, so Gantt charts don't help much. The schedule of events is largely determined by the priorities of the Product Owner and are negotiated from sprint to sprint with the developers.

The estimates are handled in two levels of detail - 1) seat of the pants 'story points' for rough sizing and scheduling at the release level, and 2) very detailed task estimates for monitoring progress through a sprint. The only deadlines are sprint demos and they are fixed by the sprint rhythm.

Really the only thing left is reporting, but given that all the underlying concepts are different, of what use will be the reporting from such a tool ?

[Previous:Managing Scrum with Dedicated Tools ]
[Next: Managing Scrum: the Right Tool for the Job ]

Comments

Kate Carruthers said…
Your points are valid for the Scrum work itself, it is managed adequately via the Scrum process. However, often the Scrum is delivered as part of a larger program of work that needs to be coordinated and reported to management. This is the problem area where we need to let Scrum happen properly and not impose Project Management tools that don't make sense or add value. But we still need to recognise the need to report effectively on the work done so that management can percieve the value being delivered across the entire portfolio of projects (both waterfall & agile). Still working on answers for that one though.

Popular posts from this blog

Sample Definition of Done

Why does Scrum have a Definition of Done? Simple, everyone involved in the project needs to know and understand what Done means. Furthermore, Done should be really done, as in, 'there is nothing stopping us from earning value with this function, except maybe the go-ahead from the Product Owner. Consider the alternative:
Project Manager: Is this function done?
Developer: Yes
Project Manager: So we can ship it?
Developer: Well, No. It needs to be tested, and I need to write some documentation, but the code works, really. I tested it... (pause) ...on my machine. What's wrong with this exchange? To the developer and to the project manager, "done" means something rather different. To the developer in this case, done means: "I don't have to work on this piece of code any more (unless the tester tells me something is wrong)." The project leader is looking for a statement that the code is ready to ship.

At its most basic level, a definition of Done creates a sh…

Scaling Scrum: SAFe, DAD, or LeSS?

Participants in last week's Scrum MasterClass wanted to evaluate approaches to scaling Scrum and Agile for their large enterprise. So I set out to review the available frameworks. Which one is best for your situation?

Recently a number of approaches have started gaining attention, including the Scaled Agile Framework ("SAFe") by Dean Leffingwell, Disciplined Agile Development (DAD), by Scott Ambler, and Large Scale Scrum (LeSS), by Craig Larman and Bas Vodde. (Follow the links for white papers or overviews of each approach).

How to compare these approaches? My starting point is Scrum in the team. Scrum has proven very effective at helping teams perform, even though it does not directly address the issues surrounding larger organizations and teams. An approach to scaling Scrum should not be inconsistent with Scrum itself.

Scrum implements a small number of principles and constraints: Inspect and Adapt. An interdisciplinary Team solves the problem. Deliver something of va…

Explaining Story Points to Management

During the February Scrum Breakfast in Zurich, the question arised, "How do I explain Story Points to Management?" A good question, and in all honesty, developers can be an even more critical audience than managers.

Traditional estimates attempt to answer the question, "how long will it take to develop X?" I could ask you a similar question, "How long does it take to get the nearest train station?

The answer, measured in time, depends on two things, the distance and the speed. Depending on whether I plan to go by car, by foot, by bicycle or (my personal favorite for short distances) trottinette, the answer can vary dramatically. So it is with software development. The productivity of a developer can vary dramatically, both as a function of innate ability and whether the task at hand plays to his strong points, so the time to produce a piece of software can vary dramatically. But the complexity of the problem doesn't depend on the person solving it, just …