“Maarten, we would like your support to implement Scrum in our organization (roughly 70 persons in 7 teams) within the next 3 months. Oh yeah, forgot to mention, we don’t have a budget for any Scrum Masters.”
In the ever-evolving landscape of agile methodologies, Scrum has emerged as a popular framework for managing complex projects. Central to the Scrum framework is the role of the Scrum Master, a facilitator and coach responsible for ensuring the team adheres to Scrum practices. Traditionally, a Scrum Master is tasked with removing impediments, facilitating ceremonies, and coaching the team on Scrum principles. Their role is considered crucial in fostering collaboration, communication, and continuous improvement within the team. However, as organizations navigate the nuances of agile implementation, it’s worth questioning whether every team truly requires a Scrum Master.
When considering the need for a Scrum Master, there are 2 major implicit assumptions:
- There is a desire to apply Scrum (just one of many options).
- There is a belief that the cost of the Scrum Master will be offset by higher productivity and enhanced well-being of the ‘developers’.
While the Scrum Master role is undoubtedly valuable in many contexts, the notion that it is universally essential for every agile team may be a one-size-fits-all approach (cfr ScrumFit). To be clear, for a team size of 7 to 10 that is not yet fully mature in its Scrum adoption, it is probably worthwhile to have a Scrum Master.
Mature and self-organized teams might not require constant guidance from a Scrum Master. These teams often possess the skills and experience to navigate challenges independently. In some organizations, a strong, agile culture may empower teams to function well without a designated Scrum Master, while others may find the role indispensable.
Empowering team members to take on leadership roles and responsibilities within the team can diminish the need for a dedicated Scrum Master. Encouraging a shared leadership model can contribute to a more dynamic and self-sufficient team.
Someone testified:
” We decided not to have Scrum Masters anymore because of budgetary reasons. The impact was somewhat surprising:
- People took more responsibility to keep the board up to date, as there was no Scrum Master anymore to clean up the mess.
- They appreciated the retrospectives more because they became more relevant. The Scrum Master often lacked the technical know-how to ask the right questions. “
It is hard to justify a Scrum Master for a small team size of 3 or 4. In such organisations, the overhead is simply too large, and leading 3 teams as a Scrum Master is not ideal either. However, this does not imply one can simply do without a Scrum Master. It is important that someone, e.g., an Agile coach, helps set up initial practices and processes for the team to get a structure that fosters a more Agile way of working and allows for continuous evolution.
Conclusion
In the ever-changing landscape of agile methodologies, the role of the Scrum Master has been a cornerstone in ensuring the smooth adoption of Scrum practices within teams. However, as our exploration unfolds, it becomes evident that the need for a Scrum Master is not a universal constant. The decision to have or not have a Scrum Master should be a thoughtful one, considering the unique characteristics of each team, project, and organizational culture.
While a Scrum Master can be invaluable for teams still maturing in their Scrum adoption, more mature and self-organized teams might find themselves flourishing without constant guidance. Hence, “No! Not every team requires a Scrum Master.”
Let’s embrace the flexibility and adaptability that agile methodologies inherently offer. Whether a team has a Scrum Master or not, the ultimate goal is to foster collaboration, communication, and continuous improvement, paving the way for a more agile and resilient organization.