Lol gilfoyle is such a clown. He's like the Ron Swanson of this show. Self interested, opinionated and ultimately a clueless hack. But really good at his job so, ya know, sticks around.
Scrum created terms to make things more fun, gamification. Tasks > Stories, Project > Epic, Estimation > Story Points, Sprint is a time period to induce speed/run. Only term they missed is planning, that could have been renamed to something funier.
Best origin I've heard is it's short for "user story". The user has a story of an experience in your product. Such as "when I click on a button next to my name, I can rename myself". The task is to make that story a reality. I'd heard of this user story term long before scrum was a thing.
Best thing is, most companies who use scrum, use it for 3 things : 1. have daily standups so everybody can say "yesterday i worked on x, and im still working on x" 2. have daily standups so "leaders" can shame you in front of everybody with "why does this take so long?" for every freaking task 3. have sprints so in the second half of the sprint they can double up point 2. there are no groomings, there are no plannings, there are no all-team estimations, there are no retrospectives, because "go code instead of sitting in a meeting". I have worked for several companies, and only 1 did it right. Was the best, most stress free job of my career, shame that they thought fruit friday can replace more-than-inflation raises.
As a developer who's worked for several years in several different scrum teams for several different companies, I only have one thing to say: I fucking hate Scrum.
All the requirements to reach that number that "management" is looking at is always awful. Creates unnecessary pressure if things doesn't go as planned.
Continuous Improvement Team: Serious moving of post-it notes around a notice board Me 🙋: I’ve an improvement suggestion, can you buy the equipment that we need to do our job Continuous Improvement: No that costs money Me: So what’s going to improve then?
One thing I've realized after 14 years of coding is that every single project is different. While it should be obvious to devs 10-15 years in the business how long something would take, a lot of times, people with this much experience are mostly working on new things. New things take Research before development. And thus, you cant simply say how long it will take. You end up giving WAGs, LOEs, and then the scrums turn into you explaining why something is taking longer than it should have when you didnt know how long it would take because it was something completely brand new. Managers just dont understand why these scrums dont work because they dont understand software development. What's funny is that the fear of getting shat on in front of your peers during scrums forces these devs to push out shit code that then gets flagged by QA anyway, and spends weeks in QA as bugs are sorted out that shouldve been found during dev. Managers are catching on and instead of simply realizing that things take time, they are adding new stories, epics, and LOE driven metrics to try and fix an issue that would simply be solved by removing scrums altogether and having 1 on 1 meetings where they help devs become more productive by asking them what they need.
Coming from someone with 20+ yrs of experience both in coding and management - you are not using scrum right. You need clarification tasks in your backlog where you do the initial investigation. You estimate clarification tasks, just like you estimate any other tasks. Based on the task clarification you estimate dev and QA tasks using some quantifiable metric. You calculate team velocity based on past task completion. You then fill up the sprint with estimated tasks to match the team’s capacity. It works great and provides more predictability than any other method if done right, in my experience.
@@pani3610actually there is a person called sm, their entire job is to make sure that the sprint flows as smoothly as possible and work to clear any blockers for the dev or testing team
@@pani3610if you don’t have a decent scrum master, either your team is too small, or developers’ time is getting wasted in tracking, follow ups and stuff.
yep.. it just gets you to complete tasks faster, there is nothing in here to increase reliability or decent coding., you just endup pushing the shite to testing where massive booooogs get missed. and if you say that it bullshit, then just take a look at the CVE database.
I don't mind scrum, especially coming from software job that interacts a lot with our clients. What I hate is the idiotic lingo that the client's project / business managers come up with, seemingly to make things sound more sophisticated; actually I hate all sales rep related lingo, it's all flowery pitch making speak... Like wtf, "stories", "epics" and all this other BS wordage. It's like they got a linguistic arts major to develop and engineering roadmap. The wordage is purely for the client, because it sounds good; they still don't know or often care. As a dev all i care about are tasks/sub-tasks, whether they are part of a specific deliverable/milestone, the type of task (feature/bug/etc) and priority (blocker/high/low/etc). Keep communications clear, simple and direct for the engineers.
currently doing my project management course (because I took on a task that I later found out was more of a project) and so far I'm starting to reach Scrum and, to be fair, from the moment this module started, it felt like corpo/sales/woowoo bullshit lingo from the beginning. I get linear and flexible methodologies like Waterfall and Agile (AND EVEN SO, I kinda feel that Agile has this "how do you do, fellow teenagers" energy to it), but scrum is outright bloated with that contrived wording dogshit.
100% agree. I’ve said the same thing at work a million times and somehow nobody agrees with me. It makes me feel like I’m the crazy one. I’m glad I quit that job.
That is the point of scrum. That's the reason for the restrospective, to adapt scrum to the team. To give to the developers the tools do decide how they want to work as a team.
@@Lumcoin Just kanban is far better. No story points planning poker garbage. No redundant unnecessary parasite managers trying to justify their existence. Have a product expert who knows what the client wants(this can even be the client) he puts together the feature tickets and prioritizes them. Devs can add tickets as well for refactoring that is needed, bugs, scope creep, etc. Devs can ask the product expert additional questions if the ticket isn't detailed enough. Instead of a SM you hire a senior dev(team lead) who helps plan implementation and architecture alongside the other devs. You can even do continuous deployment and push to production as tasks are finished and code is reviewed. No Sprints, no ridiculous ceremonies.
I hate Agile so much. It’s just a creative way of micromanaging, and it’s not even that creative. Even worse is that it gives all those project managers that the world had no clue what to do with and actually gave them some power.
@@abchernin ok scrum master, first of all, no one said anything about large. Second of all, you get the requirements from the customer and you take them do the developer. Then let that man do his job. If it was about requirement gathering instead of micromanaging, the whole system would have more focus on the product owners, and less focus on a daily stand up where developers say what they did yesterday and what they are doing today.
@@elephantintheroom3854 not a scrum master, never said so. Been a "customer" and around them for a long while, though. Seen a few ways of working with IT. Seen failed scrum. Seen failed waterfall (literally 10-12months to initiate a project). Never seen a well-working system that couldn't be characterized as a version of agile. What you've suggested turns into black box waterfall or black box ad hoc agile pretty quick.
@@elephantintheroom3854 daily standups are bullshit, though, I agree ) and the more you can centralise product ownership, the less project managers you need and the smoother things go. It's just very difficult to keep real ownership centralised as business and IT separate with growth. Not impossible but difficult.
Reading the comments here just drives home the main weakness of scrum: few people actually understand it. It's a simple process with a complicated purpose. You'd think that would mean it's easy to execute, but if you follow a process without understanding its purpose, it's not going to work.
@@vmaxxk Nope! I'm a senior engineer who received product owner certification about eight years ago. I know it sounds absolutely crazy, but training can actually teach you something, unless you're sure you already know everything.
@@Semiotichazey I’ve been working on scrum teams for about 7 years now, just acquired the CSPO cert and the training was incredibly valuable. I wish I had done it sooner. Everyone working with scrum should do the relatively short training I think!
Most things are common sense, but not to everyone. That's why you put "common sense" in a system and teach it. If you are good at a task without being aware of why you are good at it, then you can't necessarily repeat it at a time of your choosing and apply it systematically. It's like people who are good leaders. They have a talent for it, but they only become truly great, when they become aware of why they are different than bad leaders even though it might be second nature to them.
It’s less of about implementing what is common sense and more about shedding off the cognitive load of managing the tasks rather than doing them. That being said, as a Software Engineer I hate Scrum and all the plannings and retros and what not but I can anticipate things going haywire without it.
This is my boss trying to eagerly get me to estimate how much time/effort something will take. I dunno man...I haven't looked at it. So now I ruin his metrics because I always say three. Three has no meaning. Its not meant to be hours or days. Yet somehow it always is... I don't think scrum works when you don't give a shit if you finish before your coworkers 😂
@@rice83101 The estimation in scrum isnt supposed to be in work hours but to show how much time a story will take, so the PO might prioritise which sotry to take in which sprint. E.g he knows that the team does about 60 Story Points in a strint. He might choose to include 6 10 point stories, 3 20 point sories or a mix of those two.
And thus the story points became work hours anyway :D I know that's not how you're supposed to think about it, I just can't think about it any differently. Especially when someone outside the team asks "how long will it take?" - "20 story points" - "I have no idea what that means, I can't remember and convert every team's story point velocity in my head."
@@rice83101 Exactly! And there's another aspect that makes it even worse. The trick is to learn to game the scrum system. To win you make everything sound more difficult than it is and you deliberately give stories ambiguous titles that don't sound ambiguous. Then you always _"complete"_ your stories on time. The next level deception is to create overlapping stories that no one realizes are overlapping. My personal experience is that developers who master the scrum game tend to be the least productive and write the buggiest code.
@@BarrySliskit does, but the devil is in the details. Scrum sugest to use points in the sale of [1,2,3,5,10,15,20,40,100] instead of time because the same story can be solved at different timings in different devs hands. I have seen people using Fibonacci numbers and clothes sizes as measure as well.
@@BarrySliskthe second problem is the mindset of the team. Scrum is a methodology designed to improve people teamwork. But as soon as they start working, they transform this in a competition and the scrum master don't even care about that, he is just happy looking how they are "working in scrum". It is ovbious how this is going to end, they will burn out.
"This just became a job" - 😂
"F- off, we're working"
Lol gilfoyle is such a clown. He's like the Ron Swanson of this show. Self interested, opinionated and ultimately a clueless hack. But really good at his job so, ya know, sticks around.
top comment on both videos, lol
Exactly
Scrum = “We have no idea how long this will take or what it’ll cost”
I've been a data scientist for 3 years and we use this system and I didn't understand what a story was until now.
I've got a story why don't you
It’s just a little bite of value. Like adding a working button to a web page
@@chrisd4813 shut up Jared
Scrum created terms to make things more fun, gamification. Tasks > Stories, Project > Epic, Estimation > Story Points, Sprint is a time period to induce speed/run. Only term they missed is planning, that could have been renamed to something funier.
Best origin I've heard is it's short for "user story". The user has a story of an experience in your product. Such as "when I click on a button next to my name, I can rename myself". The task is to make that story a reality. I'd heard of this user story term long before scrum was a thing.
Best thing is, most companies who use scrum, use it for 3 things :
1. have daily standups so everybody can say "yesterday i worked on x, and im still working on x"
2. have daily standups so "leaders" can shame you in front of everybody with "why does this take so long?" for every freaking task
3. have sprints so in the second half of the sprint they can double up point 2.
there are no groomings, there are no plannings, there are no all-team estimations, there are no retrospectives, because "go code instead of sitting in a meeting". I have worked for several companies, and only 1 did it right. Was the best, most stress free job of my career, shame that they thought fruit friday can replace more-than-inflation raises.
How did the one company do it right?
@@travcannon .
if your leaders are shaming you in front of everybody it's not scrum that's the problem lmao
yeah, just tell us how they'd manage to make it better than the rest, it's quality information right there
I'm wondering how they did it right too. pls tell us
"He thinks this wall of psych 101 MBA bullshit is going to motivate us."
why are 90% of bosses unironically like that in real life
Cause they took the Psych 101 course in their MBA 😂
Because it works.
@@PhilippBlum no its not, its stressful
@@ravimukti690 It's one way of doings things, there may be better ones.
@@PhilippBlum aggree with that, so hope company understood their employee was underpressure doing this waterfall scrum thing
I laughed at this as humor, then one day got a new job where they practiced scrum, and this clip went from comedy to horror.
This is the best scene in this Season.
Jared - "We need to trust the system."
Oh man, I miss this show so much
What show is this
That "fuck off we're working" was filled with sadness
First sprint it works. Second onwards devs say “screw it”.
if you have a jared it keeps working
As a developer who's worked for several years in several different scrum teams for several different companies, I only have one thing to say: I fucking hate Scrum.
What's better than scrum?
@@Lumcoinwaterfall
All the requirements to reach that number that "management" is looking at is always awful. Creates unnecessary pressure if things doesn't go as planned.
@@hariseldon02no
boo hoo, everyone hates work. if there was no management system then things would go to shit and you know it
Continuous Improvement Team: Serious moving of post-it notes around a notice board
Me 🙋: I’ve an improvement suggestion, can you buy the equipment that we need to do our job
Continuous Improvement: No that costs money
Me: So what’s going to improve then?
They always leave the second part off: Continuous improvement... of margins.
0:44 Every interaction I've ever had with a Dev while working as an SM.
As a dev, I hate the name “stories” and “epics” so much. How about we just give things obvious names they already had like “tasks” and “project”.
"I've got a story for you..."
Scrum is just micromanagement in different clothes. Always has been.
💯
Bingo
Yeah and in IT, usually involving longdistance (wfh)
If you were done nobody would ask you how you are doing.
Waterfall for life. Everything up front, shut the door for 6 months, then get you get a finished product.
"This just became a job!" LOL
I’m about to finish up my Scrum Master course and those as the first scene that popped in my head as I was listening to my instructor lol
The power you will soon wield will make you feel absolutely awesome.
Every day of my life: "F*ck off, we're working"
I use this video for all of my training of Agile/Scrum to Europeans. haha so good and it get's the message across better than I could.
"You all know this is bullshit, but wait! Look at this fake scenario!"
If this gets the message across better than you could, you might want to work on your communication skills
@@jeremytheoneofdestiny8691it’s just a funny video chill
What message? Those idiots takes a methodology designed for colaboration and inmediatly transform it in a competition
This just made my day. Thank you!
Oh my Jira
Jira is my nemesis
That's not scrum. That's kanban
Actually, that would be Scrumban.
@@jairosebastianpalaciosbule4544 Actually actually, it's kanscrumban
@@usernamepasswordGmy favorite is when Scrum says “its kanban time!”
I believe it’s called “kanchortlemyballs”
Actually it's Kanmybum
One thing I've realized after 14 years of coding is that every single project is different. While it should be obvious to devs 10-15 years in the business how long something would take, a lot of times, people with this much experience are mostly working on new things. New things take Research before development. And thus, you cant simply say how long it will take. You end up giving WAGs, LOEs, and then the scrums turn into you explaining why something is taking longer than it should have when you didnt know how long it would take because it was something completely brand new.
Managers just dont understand why these scrums dont work because they dont understand software development. What's funny is that the fear of getting shat on in front of your peers during scrums forces these devs to push out shit code that then gets flagged by QA anyway, and spends weeks in QA as bugs are sorted out that shouldve been found during dev. Managers are catching on and instead of simply realizing that things take time, they are adding new stories, epics, and LOE driven metrics to try and fix an issue that would simply be solved by removing scrums altogether and having 1 on 1 meetings where they help devs become more productive by asking them what they need.
Coming from someone with 20+ yrs of experience both in coding and management - you are not using scrum right. You need clarification tasks in your backlog where you do the initial investigation. You estimate clarification tasks, just like you estimate any other tasks. Based on the task clarification you estimate dev and QA tasks using some quantifiable metric. You calculate team velocity based on past task completion. You then fill up the sprint with estimated tasks to match the team’s capacity.
It works great and provides more predictability than any other method if done right, in my experience.
As a functioning Scrum Master myself, this is hilarious!
And the number of "no, that's not how to do it" should also jump out at ya (if you should chose to employ Scrum in the first place).
Fuck you all scum masters.
there's no such thing as a functioning 'scrum master'
@@pani3610actually there is a person called sm, their entire job is to make sure that the sprint flows as smoothly as possible and work to clear any blockers for the dev or testing team
@@pani3610if you don’t have a decent scrum master, either your team is too small, or developers’ time is getting wasted in tracking, follow ups and stuff.
yep.. it just gets you to complete tasks faster, there is nothing in here to increase reliability or decent coding., you just endup pushing the shite to testing where massive booooogs get missed.
and if you say that it bullshit, then just take a look at the CVE database.
Nope, no matter what your mannager have make you think, that is no scrum
I don't mind scrum, especially coming from software job that interacts a lot with our clients. What I hate is the idiotic lingo that the client's project / business managers come up with, seemingly to make things sound more sophisticated; actually I hate all sales rep related lingo, it's all flowery pitch making speak... Like wtf, "stories", "epics" and all this other BS wordage. It's like they got a linguistic arts major to develop and engineering roadmap. The wordage is purely for the client, because it sounds good; they still don't know or often care.
As a dev all i care about are tasks/sub-tasks, whether they are part of a specific deliverable/milestone, the type of task (feature/bug/etc) and priority (blocker/high/low/etc). Keep communications clear, simple and direct for the engineers.
currently doing my project management course (because I took on a task that I later found out was more of a project) and so far I'm starting to reach Scrum and, to be fair, from the moment this module started, it felt like corpo/sales/woowoo bullshit lingo from the beginning. I get linear and flexible methodologies like Waterfall and Agile (AND EVEN SO, I kinda feel that Agile has this "how do you do, fellow teenagers" energy to it), but scrum is outright bloated with that contrived wording dogshit.
100% agree. I’ve said the same thing at work a million times and somehow nobody agrees with me. It makes me feel like I’m the crazy one. I’m glad I quit that job.
One dislike from Gavin
Lol yes 😄
As a Scrum Master.... I feeeeeeeeeel that
This is more Kanban Method
Ummm “this is my life in one skit”
Love this scene😂
I worked kn 4 different companies across 8 different teams who tried scrum
All of them went back to kanban because scrum sucks
How about scrum ban
I am using JIRA, I can relate with this🤣
This is kanban
Scrum
Scrum is only good in theory. But breaks irl :)
What's better?
Maybe… But I still think we have enough stats to show that Scrum/Agile beats waterfall 😅
Yeah bruh waterfall is so much better right
That is the point of scrum. That's the reason for the restrospective, to adapt scrum to the team. To give to the developers the tools do decide how they want to work as a team.
@@Lumcoin Just kanban is far better. No story points planning poker garbage. No redundant unnecessary parasite managers trying to justify their existence.
Have a product expert who knows what the client wants(this can even be the client) he puts together the feature tickets and prioritizes them. Devs can add tickets as well for refactoring that is needed, bugs, scope creep, etc. Devs can ask the product expert additional questions if the ticket isn't detailed enough. Instead of a SM you hire a senior dev(team lead) who helps plan implementation and architecture alongside the other devs.
You can even do continuous deployment and push to production as tasks are finished and code is reviewed. No Sprints, no ridiculous ceremonies.
Haha, booyah.
I hate Agile so much. It’s just a creative way of micromanaging, and it’s not even that creative. Even worse is that it gives all those project managers that the world had no clue what to do with and actually gave them some power.
Couldn’t agree more
The alternative for large dev teams with multiple streams of requirements being?..
@@abchernin ok scrum master, first of all, no one said anything about large. Second of all, you get the requirements from the customer and you take them do the developer. Then let that man do his job. If it was about requirement gathering instead of micromanaging, the whole system would have more focus on the product owners, and less focus on a daily stand up where developers say what they did yesterday and what they are doing today.
@@elephantintheroom3854 not a scrum master, never said so. Been a "customer" and around them for a long while, though. Seen a few ways of working with IT. Seen failed scrum. Seen failed waterfall (literally 10-12months to initiate a project). Never seen a well-working system that couldn't be characterized as a version of agile. What you've suggested turns into black box waterfall or black box ad hoc agile pretty quick.
@@elephantintheroom3854 daily standups are bullshit, though, I agree ) and the more you can centralise product ownership, the less project managers you need and the smoother things go. It's just very difficult to keep real ownership centralised as business and IT separate with growth. Not impossible but difficult.
Reading the comments here just drives home the main weakness of scrum: few people actually understand it. It's a simple process with a complicated purpose. You'd think that would mean it's easy to execute, but if you follow a process without understanding its purpose, it's not going to work.
Found the manager with his scrum master certification 😂
@@vmaxxk Nope! I'm a senior engineer who received product owner certification about eight years ago. I know it sounds absolutely crazy, but training can actually teach you something, unless you're sure you already know everything.
@@Semiotichazey I’ve been working on scrum teams for about 7 years now, just acquired the CSPO cert and the training was incredibly valuable. I wish I had done it sooner. Everyone working with scrum should do the relatively short training I think!
@@SpencerATX 100%! That's exactly what I was getting at. A little training goes a long way.
Exactly
This should all be common sense. People actually have to put labels on these things.
Most things are common sense, but not to everyone. That's why you put "common sense" in a system and teach it. If you are good at a task without being aware of why you are good at it, then you can't necessarily repeat it at a time of your choosing and apply it systematically. It's like people who are good leaders. They have a talent for it, but they only become truly great, when they become aware of why they are different than bad leaders even though it might be second nature to them.
It’s less of about implementing what is common sense and more about shedding off the cognitive load of managing the tasks rather than doing them.
That being said, as a Software Engineer I hate Scrum and all the plannings and retros and what not but I can anticipate things going haywire without it.
This is IT fiction 😂
This is my boss trying to eagerly get me to estimate how much time/effort something will take. I dunno man...I haven't looked at it.
So now I ruin his metrics because I always say three. Three has no meaning. Its not meant to be hours or days. Yet somehow it always is...
I don't think scrum works when you don't give a shit if you finish before your coworkers 😂
@@rice83101 wow, that was surprisingly eye opening.
@@rice83101 The estimation in scrum isnt supposed to be in work hours but to show how much time a story will take, so the PO might prioritise which sotry to take in which sprint. E.g he knows that the team does about 60 Story Points in a strint. He might choose to include 6 10 point stories, 3 20 point sories or a mix of those two.
And thus the story points became work hours anyway :D I know that's not how you're supposed to think about it, I just can't think about it any differently. Especially when someone outside the team asks "how long will it take?" - "20 story points" - "I have no idea what that means, I can't remember and convert every team's story point velocity in my head."
@@rice83101 Exactly! And there's another aspect that makes it even worse. The trick is to learn to game the scrum system. To win you make everything sound more difficult than it is and you deliberately give stories ambiguous titles that don't sound ambiguous. Then you always _"complete"_ your stories on time. The next level deception is to create overlapping stories that no one realizes are overlapping. My personal experience is that developers who master the scrum game tend to be the least productive and write the buggiest code.
It's about making it clear what's being worked on, not about making people work faster.
😂
I hate tshirt sizes now ☹️
Back when Kumail was just all estrogen and twinkies apparently
how naive scrum masters think scrum would work
It doesn't?
@@BarrySlisk It doesn't.
@@celebrim1
Glad we got that sorted out. Debate is so giving!
@@BarrySliskit does, but the devil is in the details. Scrum sugest to use points in the sale of [1,2,3,5,10,15,20,40,100] instead of time because the same story can be solved at different timings in different devs hands. I have seen people using Fibonacci numbers and clothes sizes as measure as well.
@@BarrySliskthe second problem is the mindset of the team. Scrum is a methodology designed to improve people teamwork. But as soon as they start working, they transform this in a competition and the scrum master don't even care about that, he is just happy looking how they are "working in scrum". It is ovbious how this is going to end, they will burn out.