7
CptXRay
339d

Alright, let's talk about Scrum Masters. Honestly, I just can't wrap my head around why they're even a thing. It's like someone decided to invent a job title for a role that's already covered by other folks on the team.

I mean, think about it. Who's usually sorting out the team's issues, making sure everyone's on the same page, and keeping the project on track? That's right, it's the project manager or the lead dev. They're already in the trenches, dealing with the nitty-gritty, so why do we need this extra layer?

And don't even get me started on this "servant-leader" nonsense. It's like they're trying to be the team's buddy, but they've got no real power to make things happen. It's like being a king without a crown. Who's going to respect that?

Plus, having a Scrum Master often just leads to more red tape. Instead of getting stuff done, we're stuck in endless meetings, talking about process this and methodology that. It's like we're more focused on how we work instead of actually working.

The best teams I've seen don't need a Scrum Master to babysit them. They need a real leader, someone who's not afraid to make the tough calls and who can give them the tools they need to kick ass and take names.

So, in a nutshell, I think Scrum Masters are about as useful as a chocolate teapot. It's high time we ditched this outdated role and got back to doing what we do best: building awesome stuff.

Comments
  • 5
    One of our devs asked our scrum master:
    "What do you actually do the whole day?"

    And the scrum master said:
    "That’s a good question. I can’t tell you."
  • 2
  • 2
    I see the scrum master as the person who solves my blockers. But yes, it has no superpowers, most of the times i could solve them myself talking to the appropriate people, but that's not my job.
  • 2
    Our scrum masters are usually our dev area managers and keep the Jira boards updated, write progress reports, and coordinate communication between stakeholders (act as buffers). A lot of projects, they may spend at most an hour a day (and not every day). For us, the scrum mastery isn't an 8 hour day job.
  • 2
    It is probably a purely murrican thing. In an ultra-competitive environment where everyone is constantly involved in office politics and fighting against eachother, having a role that does nothing else but mediate isn't that bad an idea.

    Obviously, if a team consists of agreeable persons that actually like to work on a goal together instead of against eachother - they neither need a scrum master nor a leader. You can give them the tasks and each of them will work on what they like and can do best. And it will be done when it is done but without all but the first meeting overhead. They will communicate with and help eachother as needed.
  • 2
    Most places I'd worked the scrum master was the project manager, I think this works just fine.

    I definitely think it's important that the scrum master shouldn't have tickets of their own, as many of their tasks involve looking at tickets and progress objectively.
  • 3
    A scrum master is there to ensure that scrum principles are adhered correctly. So yes if the team is already living the process and doing scrum correctly he is superfluous.
    Usually the scrum master is involved at the beginning until the process is lived by the team and is called back if the team diverges from the principles again.
  • 1
    @Lensflare the master answered cryptically, with a long side eye "what is the sound of one hand clapping?"
Add Comment