One man Scrum Team. Possible?

Assuming an individual is multiskilled and has expertise in different areas of software development

As you are referring to the Scrum Team, I assume you're talking about an individual who also has sufficient skills and expertise to be a Scrum Master and Product Owner.

The word team can be problematic if you have just one person. According to Oxford Dictionary, a team is:

Two or more people working together.

The Scrum Guide also refers throughout to the members of the Development Team and Scrum Team in plural, and talks repeatedly of collaboration. Even if you can have a team of one, it's hard to see how a Development Team or Scrum Team could behave in the way expected by the Scrum Guide, if it is just one individual.

Even referring to an individual as a team is a threat to transparency, and serves as a reason not to refer to this way of working as Scrum.

But perhaps your definition of a team does allow one individual, and you're comfortable with the concept of an individual collaborating with themself. Then, you might face the question of whether it is wise to use Scrum in such a scenario.

Aside from the obvious conflicts of interest from having one person represent all three roles, the Scrum Guide advises that a Development Team should contain at least three members, albeit for reasons that you've covered in your initial post.

Would a single individual require the Scrum Events? While moments of reflection to plan for a sprint and each day, and to consider how sprints have gone may be useful, it might not be the most effective option. While it's still going to be important to focus and reflect at various points, it's not necessary for an individual to discuss and align.

Perhaps Scrum is too heavy a framework for such an individual to benefit from.

Assuming an individual is multiskilled and has expertise in different areas of software development, then can this person become a one man scrum team?

What are your thoughts about the “hero developer” and the extent to which this might actually represent an antipattern?

What are your thoughts about the “hero developer” and the extent to which this might actually represent an antipattern?

@Ian Mitchell, I kind of see it from your point of view. I am aware of the Hero Developer concept, though I'd like to read to absorb some info. Do you have any articles that talk about both the Hero Developer and the antipattern that may help me?

Though, in the case I described, there is only one person. Would a single person exhibit the Hero pattern in the absence of others?

The word team can be problematic if you have just one person.

@Simon Mayer, I was cognizant of that when I posted this. I was just trying to understand what people thought and I've also heard of one person playing all 3 roles. Hence I asked.

Would a single person exhibit the Hero pattern in the absence of others?

It would take an organization, albeit a dysfunctional one, to exhibit the antipattern. The hero may be an "enabler" for problems, lone or otherwise.

https://www.devopsgroup.com/blog/devops-death-marches-and-the-hero-hacker-myth/

A single person cannot be a team by definition; this has zero to do with Scrum but the basic definition that a TEAM is comprised of more than 1 person. 

Can 1 person develop an increment? Sure. Can 1 person follow Scrum Process Flow? If it make sense for that person, sure. But can 1 person be a Scrum Team? No. 

Of course, one person can be a Scrum team, if that person is a true bipolar (pun intended). 

What I would like to suggest is that Scrum and Agile manifesto have a serious emphasis on interpersonal interaction to improve the quality, delivery, and overall product. It is highly critical to value these human interactions. Let's be honest, nobody likes criticism (constructive or destructive), do you think that one person can inspect his/her work with utmost sincerity, adopt new processes and line of thinking? 

One of the best indicators of functional teams is that they act as a shock absorber independently and together to any shocks (and criticism) emerging from within and outside the teams.

I am yet to find that one person who can do these two things on his/her own. 

In my opinion, the Development Team in Scrum must contain more than one person, for reasons already stated regarding the definition of 'Team'.   Scrum events like the Daily Scrum, and Scrum attributes like self-organization, lose their value and meaning with a 1-person Development Team.   

And as mentioned many times in previous threads:

although implementing only parts of Scrum is possible, the result is not Scrum.

I'll say that 1 person can use Scrum but really don't see any benefit to it.  At that point you are just creating a To-Do list.  I have know people that have the skills, experience and talent to do any of the Scrum Roles but a sole individual really gains no benefit from the framework. The concept of transparency is something that benefits anyone's work in my opinion but not sure that there is much value for any of the concepts. 

Instead of Scrum, I would suggest that a sole individual that needs to be transparent about their work would be better suited to use some form of Kanban.  Limit WIP, focus on getting one thing done at a time, provide visibility to the current and future work. But even Kanban might be too heavy for one person.

My advice to that sole individual is to be agile.  Be transparent about what you are doing, constantly inspect and adapt, deliver incrementally and focus on customer value over "cool things". 

Seems interesting, bold and risky enough to give it a try. With a personal project at least. Clearly not Scrum but as project planning optimization I don't see any harm in giving it a test shot.

You may want to listen to the webinar from yesterday. Not in any way IT related, but personal and how people are using Scrum in their home lives, to deal with Neurodiversity Challenges, etc.   Very much related to Scrum for 1 or 2...

https://www.scrum.org/resources/using-scrum-home-how-scrum-can-help-conquer-neurodiversity-challenges

Late to the party on this one but no. "Scrum employs an iterative, incremental approach to optimize predictability and to control risk. Scrum engages groups of people who collectively have all the skills and expertise to do the work and share or acquire such skills as needed." Additionally, if you are looking to control risk, having a key person dependency is no the way to do it. 

Let's ask a different set of questions:

1. Who asks this question? Development organization or he/she as a freelancer?
2. Can an individual benefit from an iterative, incremental approach based on empiricism and lean thinking?
3. Can it help reduce risk and optimize predactibility?
4. Would it encourage early value delivery?
5. Can he/she work that way with his/her stakeholders?
6. Can it still make sense to have a set of transparent artifacts and inspect them regularly?
7. Taking into consideration the context, is there any better way an individual can solve complex problems and create great product?

I have the same doubt.

I'im in a project with just one developer. The team already set up, PO, Scrum Master and one developer. Is it worht it?

Ricardo,

"Is it worth" and "is it Scrum" are two different questions ;)

I don't think anyone can assert if it makes sense for you. But from my experience having one-man army in IT projects rarely makes sense and can be a risk both for the customers and for the organization. It's like universal rule, not specific to any framework. What will happen if developer get sick? Does he / she really wants to work in isolation? Wouldn't it be better to use his / her skills so that others can learn?

If this is your organizations decision, perhaps they should limit number of concurrent projects first?