Scrumwashed, Spotifaced & SPC'eed: What Do They Really Mean?

Driven on by the Agile Methods & Frameworks Wars and the race to fit all organisations into these buckets/models is the crux of it.

The Big 3 if you like, 2 pushed by certification business models and the other by HR who still don't have a clue about Architecting/Designing Organisations.

Firstly, fundamentally, there is absolutley noting wrong with each of these on thier own, based on their designs, intents, constraints and limitations, infact, they do exactly what they say they will do if followed - but here in lies the issue so called Agilisit have with prescription - some how they have made them hard rules over inspect, adopt, adapt & contextualisation when they are not or have made out that Agile is some wild west, rebellion, with no rules, no game plan to follow, not true either, but widespread and to indsutry detriment via social media.

The "washing/faced/eed" parts comes from the one size fits all - this si the best for you, its the most popular and the subsequest failed promises not being realised.

There's a few things to understand before going any deeper.

Jeff Sutherland somehow think her created Scrum, is the guru of it, but do your research and you'll see, he is merely to modern caretaker, if that, with ongoing fueds.

He is famously quoted for saying - If you're not Doing Scrum, then what are you doing" This references that Scrum is a prescriptive process to follow, satrting from Scrum Values, Scrum Theory to proactiing Scrum Processes, Events & Ceromonies. Well in truth, if you arent follwing this, then you are not doing Scrum, nor doing it right. Its a fact.

Scrum is a prescriptive process method - Do A - Z in that order, rinse and repeat.

Second, is Agile Learning Model is called Shu Ha Ri.

Adapted from Martial Arts, it describes that first you have to practice as the book says, your senssie, your Master. This enables you to learn the Ways. Then you Ha - Practice the Ways, with your Master/Sensie shaping. guding, correcting you. Once you bceom proffeinet, building your compametcy from doing repeated Katas, patterns, you then byuild capability. You can then start to Ri - iprove, adapt, change to fit your rpersonal style, context, situation, most fo the martial arts ahve simialir or the same moves. This si the Path of Learing Mastery, and it was once beleived it took 10 000hrs. Becuase we have become impatient, cnat speend toomuch time away from doing work, we have been foced into quick learning bits, from some i a good way to upskill, but for most, it lacks the depth of context, missing the meaning, the kowledge, they whys out for the hows - the process. Anyone can wave thier arms and legs about, but can you lwer your heart rate, achive clamness doing Tai Chi, or can you generate enough pwoer and force to break a leg/peice of wood from a fw inches?.

Scrumwashed

Refers to Scrum Junkies gospel in how its a complete approach to run and organisation based on thier expereince of wking inside the IT Department only.

They ebelive that if you scale/reapeat the same stuff over and over again in every team, that you'll become agile/have agility.

Thats nt the truth, not the observations made by Hirotaka Takeuchi and Ikujiro Nonaka in 1984 serves as the formal model for Scrum. Taeuchi & Nonaka looked at successful companies in Japan and the US that used a new, holistic method to develop products as opposed to older, sequential waterfall approach.

What they observed, was the coanies that could work faster, get thigns to market quicker that peple wanted to consume, were doing by passing tasks around, ot handing over, this elad to refinements/improvements, more collaboartion, more communication and that leaadership became servant, ie each peson was a leader, not a desingted leader. If it didint work, theyd change it, if the team could iprove, they would, not asking gorpermission, they jsut presented thier work for feedback. These working patterns were noticed elsewhere and became the model/basis for Scrum.

Schwaber was a waterfall enthusiast, tried to make it work in his companies, but he just couldn’t, people lfet, people tried to do other more intersting work over what tasked to them

He knew there was a need for change in the industry. In the paper SCRUM Development Process, he explain waterfall is a method that assumes software development is a well-understood process without any unexpected outcomes or problems. However, that is not true; software development is very unpredictable, ambiguos, uncertain and volatile for multiple reasons.

Sutherland started his career with a dissertation in medicine and complex systems theory. In 1986, he became responsible for the ATMs business unit in Saddlebrook Corporation. The unit used traditional project management, which led to late delivery, poor quality, and user dissatisfaction. Sutherland was supposed to fix this. The ATMs unit was problematic and the least profitable branch of the company; in short six months, he brought it up to be the most successful unit.

Later, Sutherland, Scwhaber refined Scrum into what we know it today, a,lightweight, incomplete process method for developing software covered in 18 pages i the Offical Scrum Guide.

Doing Double the Work, in Halft the Time, with Half the Resources was what really nailed the Rod to People backs using Scrum. This mantra/promise was misused, abused.

All of a sudden, it was the replacement for waterfall, for DSDM, for the V Model, but has as much success as faliure becuase of poor implmentation - custmisation.

Scrum has no Funding Model

Scrum has no priotisation model - just consensus

Scrum had no Architectural, Product or Service Design Approach - just expereimentaiton/refinement

Scrum has no estimation - a good thing, but it borrowed Agile Planning & Estimation eg User Stories & Points

I can list many holes in it, but that's the point, it was meant to be a framework which meant, its incomplete nature would be complimented by other domain practices - sadly this is where it falls down, argument came from and misunderstnadings of it use case, lmitaiton and contraints.

Spotifaced

SPC'eed

Conclusion

Perhaps what they should ideally mean is that you were provided with the ultimate advise and guidance, that yoou went all in, soups to nuts with one of them, however, it doesn't, its in reality a sad reflection of poor listening, advise, expereimentation, design & delivery.