We do our retrospective meetings after deployment Monday mornings (thank God, finally!) after every sprint.

We keep our retrospective meeting notes in a chart of sticky notes on a whiteboard so we can remember our fuckups and be accountable for them for the next sprint onwards.

Not everyone was present for the last retrospective meeting. Our product owner/db admin sure wasn't. But just awhile ago he wrote some sticky notes to add to the "What went Wrong" section of the retrospective meeting chart; some of which are rather inflammatory to some, such as "lack of accountability," "no sense of urgency," "does not follow schedule," "does not follow decisions," etc. Nobody noticed his notes until just this afternoon when he wasn't around.

So I reported this to the scrum master, asking if adding to the retrospective chart outside retrospective meetings was even allowed.

As far as my experience and my scrum maser's experience is concerned, you can't do that to a retrospective. You are not allowed to add anything to the last retrospective. You need to wait for the next one, where everyone is present.

But I wonder: I really don't know for sure if what the product owner did was against the retrospective process. To me it sure looks as if he is taking it all personally against the back-end dev, whom he had an altercation last week over a deployment mess-up.

Is it really okay to sneak up notes like that?

  • 1
    Yeah, that's not the way Scrum is supposed to work.

    Sure, Agile is all about flexibility in process and incorporating improvement, but this isn't an improvement, it's passive-aggressive bullshit that's just going to piss everyone off.
  • 1
    @halfflat then that's the second passive aggressive BS he's pulled this month. Honestly the server fuckup is his fault. He submitted a PR on a day off, then pushed his changes to production in the middle of deployment while telling nobody, then the production acts up, until server was down, then he gets the CEO to blame the back end dev for not knowing what was going on and for not reviewing and merging the changes. We're trying to be objective but it's just hard to deny the fact that the DB guy fucked up and is trying to use the back end guy as a fall guy.
Add Comment