Agile as a methodology advocates collective ownership of tasks. It prefers team work over individual performance or heroism. The Manifest talks about individuals & interactions over processes and plans. It sounds so cool - people centric thinking ...
Then come questions to mind - A lot of them ...
If the ownership is collective, does it mean everyone is Accountable and everyone Responsible too?
Whom do we sacrifice as a scape-goat if something goes wrong with Agile. If everything is going
Well, who do you say is the best of them all. With Rewarding being a mandate how do we recognize contributions without discriminating on irrelevant aspects of the achievement?
Should leadership be rewarded or criticized as an individualistic behavior?
With the team having a common notion, are we leaving room for creative suggestions by new team members?
What are the possibilities of these suggestions, at least being considered, if not tried out.
With inter-changable skills and almost equal performance/ through-put are we heading towards mediocre teams?
Will the Hercules of the team be treated equal to others?
Would we be playing to the strength of each individual or trying to normalise capabilities across the group?
If it is a team effort, should only the Scrum Master have all the answers to these questions, or should the entire team be confused about it?
Let me know if you have answers to it ...
No comments:
Post a Comment