what is the right time to release sprint??
Dear All;
i work as scrum master for software company, we are using collaborative tool to mange our work and sprints.
usually the sprint released after retrospective meeting as it follows the review meeting immediately, But we faced a different situation this time as the retrospective meeting was not held directly after review meeting for reasons related to some change in the hole company.
i feel confusion if i had to release sprint and assign time of release after review or retrospective meeting??
Knowing that the difference between the two meetings was three days, no development work related to sprint did during this time.
There is nothing in Scrum that prevents releasing as often as is convenient.
It doesn't need to wait until the Sprint ends, as long as there is already an increment that meets the definition of "Done".
Why couldn't the team hold their Sprint Review, Retrospective and Planning at the regular times?
How do the Product Owner and Development Team feel about this loss of 3 days? Do they consider it a waste? If so, what do they think should happen differently to prevent such waste in the future?
It should not be up to a Scrum Master to “assign time” for a release. The Product Owner ought to decide whether and when the release of completed work happens. Should that just-in-time business decision be made, then it ought to be possible to release an increment immediately and without fuss.
If the act of release takes effort, organization, or is otherwise non-trivial, then that would suggest that the work is not Done or that the Definition of Done is inadequate.
Yes you are right the product owner is responsible for release and he did this at review meeting ,but when we try to write the end of sprint report we didn't know if we should write the date of sprint end is after review meeting or after 3 days when we did the retrospective meeting???
we face quite other situation once, when product owner couldn't come to review because he had out site meeting.
The problem was resolved by considering the day as a working day within sprint and we continued to work until the review meeting time. We wrote in the end of sprint report that there was a variance one day due to the absence of the product owner.
but when we try to write the end of sprint report
What is an End of Sprint report? Who is the audience, and what information does this report contain that isn't available to the audience through other means? Just an opinion here, but I believe this artifact replaces a previous non-Scrum process or report, and I feel that such "status" reports are not only unnecessary documentation, but also not really referenced much.
The problem was resolved by considering the day as a working day within sprint and we continued to work until the review meeting time.
Keep in mind, the team does not have to always work within the sprint time box. Is it possible that the team can still be productive without working in a sprint? What "work" did this extra day consist of? Did the team have potential carryover items that they addressed with the extra day? Did the team bring in additional items into the sprint because of the extra day?
A couple thoughts regarding this:
- Each sprint is time-boxed to a specific duration. If a certain ceremony is not held during a sprint, that should not affect the sprint time box. Altering the sprint duration simply masks the underlying issue that needs to be addressed (PO availability, skipping Scrum ceremonies)
- Can the PO provide a proxy to approve sprint deliverables in the Sprint Review? Does the PO need to wait until the Sprint Review to approve sprint work? What is the current recourse if the PO has a planned absence (i.e. - vacation)?