Changing the Scrum Master

Interesting ! At least couple of books suggesting being absent at the daily Scrum to secretly enforce a self organizing, self governing development team to meet daily without an external facilitator. Changing Scrum Masters could be good so each party can learn what they missed with their previous team. As long as the actual Development team and Product Owner are intact changing SM does not look like such a bad idea. Please note that only SM of the three Scrum roles is least impacted by this method. The PO and the development team are heavily invested in the process and backlog that has evolved thus far.

One precaution is for the new Scrum master to understand why the team is doing what they are doing (regarding the process and best practices) before proposing any changes unless its towards improving the Scrum ideology. If this agreement is reached by the organization and teams, then I see no problem.

Going to start with this from the Scrum Guide

The Scrum Team consists of a Product Owner, the Development Team, and a Scrum Master. Scrum Teams are self-organizing and cross-functional. Self-organizing teams choose how best to accomplish their work, rather than being directed by others outside the team. 

What you are describing is that others outside the team are making a decision for the Scrum Teams. Why not ask the Teams what they think of the idea?  

 It also prevents a Team from becoming too dependent on one Scrum Master or too comfortable.

Why is that a problem if the Team is consistently delivering value? 

I can understand the idea of it providing career growth benefit to the Scrum Masters. But if all of the teams are actually doing Scrum/Agile correctly changing SMs really shouldn't have any positive impact.  The teams organize themselves to be effective. They have all come to agreements based on the skills and capabilities of the team members.  If you replace one of those members it will have impact on the team unless you can guarantee that the replacement possess the exact skills and capabilities for the person that they are replacing.

Maybe instead of doing actual swap of SMs, you could consider having SMs shadow each other?  My company has done it and are working to refine the process. It basically gives the observing SMs an opportunity to see the whole team where the involved SM can only see outside themselves.  When we have done this, it has provided some good insights for the participating SM from the observing SM.  Plus it helps all of the SMs to grow their coaching capabilities.

One precaution is for the new Scrum master to understand why the team is doing what they are doing (regarding the process and best practices) before proposing any changes unless its towards improving the Scrum ideology.

This is a great point...  you don't want a new SM coming in blind.  If you decide to do this, you need to develop a strong "hand off" process.

What you are describing is that others outside the team are making a decision for the Scrum Teams. Why not ask the Teams what they think of the idea?  

This.  I think this is the exact answer to the question.

It is interesting idea: "shadow scrum master" 😀 

I must propose it in my organization.

The thinking is that periodically rotating assignments a) is good for the Team, as they benefit from working with people who may have different relative strengths and b) it is good for the professional growth of the Scrum Master.

Why rotate it periodically? Why not encourage teams to self-organize based on empirical evidence of how things are going, and to inspect and adapt team composition accordingly?

Every time I see this theme of changing the scrum master or scrum master rotation I have the chills.

It seems that many people / companies still do not understand the role of the scrum master, giving that air of which it is a temporary role, or he is only there to teach the Scrum and finished.

I do not see anyone wanting to do a rotation or change of PO or a developer for example.

In my opinion the Scrum master is "Eternal", this is because taking the initial fact that he must engage and train the team/company at the start, he is also responsible for ensuring that the team is always evolving, while the PO refines and maximizes the value and Dev Team Turns backlog into software, Scrum master is constantly looking at ways to help the team and the company to be better, and that is perennial.

In other words, changing the Scrum master or scrum master rotation is as bad as changing a member of your Dev Team or the PO and you will have performance reduction with these approaches because it's all about team interaction, and change a member of the Team is not good.

And Paul, please do not take this text as a criticism to you, at no time I meant to offend you(sorry if I did), I'm just being generic on the subject :)

Here is something from the scrum guide about the Scrum Master Role that is important to remember and why the Scrum Master It's a perennial role.

• Causing change that increases the productivity of the Scrum Team; and,
• Working with other Scrum Masters to increase the effectiveness of the application of Scrum in the organization.

Hi Paul,

I foresee little value in this approach. It seems disruptive to the working relationship that a Scrum Master builds with his/her team. For example, if there’s an individual in the development team that’s particularly shy and takes a while to open up, s/he may not be keen on speaking up in discussions - especially Retrospectives, where people it’s common to share feelings and opinions.

I do understand that rotation is an attempt at leveraging on different approaches that SMs have. However, this can be tackled by the SMs sharing ideas during Scrum Master ‘coffee sessions’ or sitting in on each other’s ceremonies once in a while.

No two Scrum Masters are the same, but they do hold the same Scrum values which can benefit any team.

Thank you, all!