Who is allowed to attend a Daily Meeting

Hi Illya:

I don't think anything has changed from your initial understanding. The key word in the Scrum guide is participate. Others who are not the Development Team can attend but they do not participate.

Well, the Product Owner usually doesn't understand what the developers are talking about, so he is useless anyway. Other stakeholders - especially managers - tend not to understand anything either but may feel the urge to "manage something" once they are there. So they are better off not being there.

What I usually do is, I ask the Team at the beginning of the Daily Scrum if they allow certain spectators to participate. The spectators however are briefed in advance that they are not expected to talk.
Regarding the PO: It largely depends on the person. If both he and the developers see a benefit in it, he of course is there (usually to answer questions right when they surface).

I had a poor experience in the past when the PO was also the part of the Development Team thus he attended the meeting. The Team felt as they were reporting to the PO about the status.

This is interesting. I can definitely see a value of having the PO at the daily scrum. For example when deciding what stories to skip if the team realize that they cannot deliver all stories in a sprint or to discuss changing the scope of existing stories. To me this increase transparency for the PO. The scrum guide is quite clear on this though, the meeeting is for the dev. team only.

This is interesting. I can definitely see a value of having the PO at the daily scrum. For example when deciding what stories to skip if the team realize that they cannot deliver all stories in a sprint or to discuss changing the scope of existing stories.

Frederik, I believe these discussions are out of Daily Scrum agenda. And this is clearly defined in Scrum Guide too. The members of Development Team should answer only 3 questions, that's it. The rest is out of the Daily Scrum scope.

In my experience it is the Development Team that only takes part in the Daily Scrum. However, after the Daily Scrum is over, other brief meetings are just added ad hoc. And there it is good to have the PO and maybe other stakeholders at hand.
--> Distinguish between the Daily Scrum (where only the Development Team shall talk and shall talk to each other) and the subsequent discussions (where not the entire Development Team attends, but a lot of bilateral talks take place).
--> It is up to the Scrum Master to delay such discussions for after the Daily Scrum and keep this timebox within 15 minutes. I even prefer shorter Daily Scrums.

--> Distinguish between the Daily Scrum (where only the Development Team shall talk and shall talk to each other) and the subsequent discussions (where not the entire Development Team attends, but a lot of bilateral talks take place).

I absolutely agree with you. Also it's a good practice to have a parking lot when holding a Daily Scrum where you put the issues that can be discussed after the meeting.

. However, after the Daily Scrum is over, other brief meetings are just added ad hoc.

I've seen this as well, and I think it is generally a good thing, especially if it is mostly ad hoc meetings organized by the Dev Team. I've heard this concept called "The after meeting."

Some things potentially harmful to Scrum to watch out for with this practice:
* Authoritarian type managers/execs/PO's who might "hover" to silently observe the Daily Scrum might be tempted to exert command and control in the after meetings, or require an after meeting every day to exert such control.

* Be careful of developers discovering impediments the previous day but *waiting* until the DS/after meeting to deal with them. The best way to remove impediments is to handle them immediately if possible. Coach your team to always be removing impediments, and not just waiting until the DS to do so.

Other than those two anti-patterns above, the "after meeting" is a great concept, and as Daniel said, it helps keep the DS itself very short. Even on larger(9-10 devs) distributed teams that I've coached, they were able to keep their DS to 10 minutes or less.

Regarding the DS, it is also worth noting that a) there is no requirement that it be a standup meeting, though that is often a great practice and b) there is no Scrum rule against solving impediments within the DS. So long as you can keep it to the 15 minute time-box, and the conversation is on topic for DS content (yesterday/today/impediments), you can do whatever you want in that meeting.

-------
Charles Bradley
http://www.ScrumCrazy.com

I'll claim that the meeting is definitely not just about answering the 3 questions. With that agenda the daily standup runs the risk of turning into a status meeting. The daily scrum is a planning meeting for the next 24 hrs. Inspect what has been done since the last meeting and adapt accordingly to maximize the likelyhood of meeting the sprint goal. The PO must be involved e.g. when deciding what stories to skip in the current sprint and to me the daily scrum is the ideal time to have this discussion. If the team asks the PO to decide things like this after the DS the plan for the day may be useless. Don't you agree?

@Illya http://blog.appliedis.com/2012/10/09/daily-scrum-attack-the-day/

Scrum expects us to use our intellect. I wouldn't take those questions quite so literally. Plan for the next 24 hours.

My company has different definition of the Team. Product Owner and Scrum Master are full time members of the CORE team. Every one on the CORE team attend the daily scrum. Extend Team (ie architect, project manager) is invited, but do not participate. When Extend Team has questions, they will call the people involved (usually starting with Scrum Master) and discuss them after meeting. It's great collaboration and communication within and outside the team.

Fredrik,

I'll claim that the meeting is definitely not just about answering the 3 questions. With that agenda the daily standup runs the risk of turning into a status meeting. The daily scrum is a planning meeting for the next 24 hrs. Inspect what has been done since the last meeting and adapt accordingly to maximize the likelyhood of meeting the sprint goal.

^^ Agree 110%, and this is a concept that is not understood by many practitioners as they focus too much on the 3 questions and item status.

The PO must be involved e.g. when deciding what stories to skip in the current sprint...

^^ True, and the whole Dev Team must also be involved.

...and to me the daily scrum is the ideal time to have this discussion...

^^ Is it always the ideal time to have that discussion?

If the team asks the PO to decide things like this after the DS the plan for the day may be useless. Don't you agree?

Let me take your point here one more step. Let's say that the team needs a PO decision on what things to add or drop from a sprint. As we know, the Dev Team and PO must be present when this decision is made. Let's say your Daily Scrum is at 10am. At 1pm, the Dev Team realizes it might need to drop an item from the sprint.

Should that team wait until 10am the next day to have that discussion?

Charles,

I am not saying that the PO must attend the daily scrum but I am questioning the reason why the scrum guide explicitly states that the DS is for dev team only. I am guessing it's to prevent the DS from becoming just a discussion/negotiation between the PO and the dev team, allowing no time for the dev team to plan their work.

Fredrik,

but I am questioning the reason why the scrum guide explicitly states that the DS is for dev team only.

Fredrik, I think you are very right to ask this question, and it's a good one. The short answer is I don't know exactly why the Scrum Guide was written that way, as I was not involved in writing that part of the Scrum Guide.(or any other part, to date, though I have given some feedback to Scrum.org on occasion).

However, here is my guess, based on my Scrum knowledge and experiences:
* The Dev Team(DT) has no other Scrum event where it is just them exclusively, so to ensure that they have every reasonable opportunity at self organization, the Daily Scrum was explicitly described as only the DT participates.

** Having anyone else participate, especially people who might be viewed as authority figures (SM, PO, Managers, etc) carries the risk of completely destroying the self organization of the DT. Giving any of these authority figures even the slightest daylight in the Scrum Guide would probably encourage them to try and participate. I think it is ok for the SM to facilitate the DS for a team that is learning, but facilitating is not the same as participating(as in, answering the 3 questions, etc).

*** Along this theme, having any other authoritative figure present also runs the risk of the DS turning into a status or "report up" meeting, which is definitely NOT what we want.

** I'll go one step further. I'd prefer that no one else(besides the DT, and the SM when needed) be *present* at the DS, because it discourages transparency. People who are being observed by an authority figure will not be as transparent as those who are free from such observation.

* The purpose of the DS is to inspect and adapt the plan. Many studies have shown that when a team is empowered to self organize to provide it's own plan, it is much more likely to execute that plan well and on time. Introducing others means reducing the empowerment, IMO.

** The PO has no role in coming up with the plan -- only the ordering, definition(acceptance tests), and clarification of PBI's. The PO has all kinds of influence over the "WHAT", but only the Dev Team owns "THE HOW". Therefore, one might say that the DS is for the "HOW', and not for the "WHAT".

* Since we often want the PO to be someone empowered, from the business side of the house, it may be impractical to require them to come to the Daily Scrum -- because of their business side duties. OTOH, IMO, there is no such thing as too much communication between the PO and team. IME, very few Scrum teams can get along well without a lot of interaction with the PO. Maybe the DS is just not the appropriate time for it. Let's remember, the DS is only 15 minutes, so there *are* another 7 hours and 45 minutes of the day(typical US work day) when the PO can collaborate with the DT. I mean, you could have a PO Q&A just before your DS(so long as it does not impact the DS in any way -- and that includes the DS start time) every day, if you're really worried about PO decision affecting the plan. However, the reality is your team should be interacting with the PO *whenever* the PO is needed. While the PO need not be present all day every day, they should be pretty highly available all day every day, IMO. In summary, there is a very wide range of how much actual time a PO spends with a team or managing the backlog. As such, taking them out of having to participate in the DS allows for POs who also spend a fair amount of their time with stakeholders or in non Scrum team/business activities.

Many of the obstacles you mentioned can be solved in other ways besides at the DS. The Scrum Framework encourages you do to do whatever you can to solve these issues on your own

Whoops. I hit the "submit" button too soon.

The Scrum Framework encourages you do to do whatever you can to solve these issues on your own

Should read:
The Scrum Framework encourages you do to do whatever you can to solve these issues on your own, without changing the framework itself. As the Scrum Guide says, "Scrum’s roles, artifacts, events, and rules are immutable and although implementing only parts of Scrum is possible, the result is not Scrum."

Hmm, same topic, different thread. Here's my view, as stated in the other thread:
I always tell that the meeting is mandatory for the Development Team, as you say. It is after all their meeting, their inspection of their work.
I tell that Scrum Master and Product Owner are allowed to join the meeting. This seems to have a positive effect on the team; it shows they are connected and committed as Scrum Team members. But if they join, behave as every other Scrum Team member. So, don't start leading the meeting. I ask them to answer the 3 questions from their perspective. It keeps the others informed, and it helps to keep the Product Owner to be accurately informed which is quite helpful for his/her stakeholder management.
And don't forget that the 3 questions are indeed only a means to get the right information in the open. Just formally answering the 3 questions for the sake of it isn't helping either.

Charles,

Thanks for your detailed reply. I am inclined to agree on most parts.

Fredrik,

You're welcome, and I'm glad you found value. It's an excellent question, which leads me to believe you are on a good path towards good Scrum. Keep asking the tough questions!

I am new to Scrum and was reading the Scrum Guideline. In page #10 it states 'Every day, the Development Team should be able to explain to the Product Owner and Scrum Master how it intends to work together as a self-organizing team to accomplish the goal and create the anticipated Increment in the remainder of the Sprint.'
My question here is, how does/should this communication take place, during the Daily Scrum or via email or any other Status Reporting method as we see project management methodologies?

"Should be able to"
This is illustrating the purpose of the Daily Scrum, not a reporting
structure or explicit activity that must occur.

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 2:06 AM, <ScrumForum@scrum.org> wrote:

>

I agree with Ryan -- this is simply a description of the "outcome" or "acceptance criteria" for a healthy Daily Scrum.

I also agree with that Ryan that this is not an explicit activity, though I think occasionally it is ok for the PO and/or SM to request that the Dev Team give a 1-2 minute summary of their plan for achieving the Sprint Goal and Increment, especially when they have trouble seeing what that plan might be. In short, I'd probably only ask for the summary once a sprint every now and then, and I would NOT do it during the DS. I'd probably do it just after the DS is completely over.

Thanks Ryan and Charles, for your input. This clarifies my doubt.

Sunandajit,

You're welcome. Happy to help!

I guess there is one point that is mostly misunderstood here. The question is about the below statement from scrum guide "The Scrum Master enforces the rule that only Development Team members participate in the Daily Scrum".

They key to come to terms with the above statement is the word "PARTICIPATE" !. Please note that Both the PO and the scrum master can still ATTEND the daily scrum for their own interests (The PO to be readily available clarify the requirements and/or to adjust the Sprint backlog as needed by the development team's decision and the SM to make sure the team is having the daily scrum and serving the intended purpose of the meeting)

Only the development team participates and they can even invite the needed parties they think can help resolve the impediments or set the decisions for the next 24 hrs. Basically this event is OWNED by the development team. SM's job is to make sure they are owning it and having it everyday. His job is not to manage it or them!

Both the SM and the PO SERVE the development team in all ways possible to help them achieve what they plan for the next 24 hrs.

I hope this clarifies the responsibility and interaction levels of the three scrum roles (SM, PO and development team member) in a daily scrum!

Helllo! How would you deal with the team's manager when he wants to attend every single meeting (Daily stand-up, retro, sprint planning etc) and especially asking questions in a way that turn the DS into a status report meeting (he even tries to control the retrospective meeting sometimes and he doesn't let the team talk but he is giving directions).

If this is a Scrum Development Team, why do they have a manager?

Dear @ThemKokas ,

A SCRUM team is not a master and servant hierarchy. Scrum means all to one, collaborating, co-creating and contributing team value that is always more valuable than the value of a person. The team is above any member, the people are more important as well, because their collaboration enriches the result that in this methodology is continuous.

So, it is most important all team members understand the vision and how much advantage has the Scrum team model, methodologie.

Probably in this case, the "manager" should be roled as Product Owner and act as, under the Scrum vision of course.

Hope this can help you.

Have a nice day.

I agree with Fredrik that the daily stand ups end up being a status meeting. As for the question.

PO is recommended to attend this meeting but is not mandatory for PO to attend. Because the backlog is ready and this meeting is essentially the planning of the next 24 hours over the PBI which already have been refined for the ongoing Sprint. PO should attend this meeting to understand any impediment related to a PBI and acceptance criteria. and also it gives him an idea what he should, henceforth, take into consideration. And if PO doesn't attend this meeting and should there be anything that should be communicated to the PO then SM should take this to the PO.

Helllo! How would you deal with the team's manager when he wants to attend every single meeting (Daily stand-up, retro, sprint planning etc) and especially asking questions in a way that turn the DS into a status report meeting (he even tries to control the retrospective meeting sometimes and he doesn't let the team talk but he is giving directions).

From the Scrum Guide: The Scrum Master helps those outside the Scrum Team understand which of their interactions with the Scrum Team are helpful and which aren’t. The Scrum Master helps everyone change these interactions to maximize the value created by the Scrum Team.

The fact is managers exist, and we have to have empathy for them and work with them as Scrum Masters to understand how to work with the Scrum Team.  There are some Scrum events where the manager can keep up with what is going on, such as the Sprint Review and Daily Scrum.  I see no problem if they come to observe, learn and listen at the Daily.  Scrum Masters can also teach the managers the importance of building trust with their team, and the value of a self organizing team.

Since managers don't like to be kept in the dark, might information radiators help bring visibility?  What Scrum artifacts can shed light on Sprint Retrospective continuous improvement items?

Going over this thread to find the answer to the same question asked in this thread.

I do get that Dev team is responsible for Daily Scrum but at the same time Scrum guide mentions that 

The Daily Scrum is an internal meeting for the Development Team. If others are present, the Scrum Master ensures that they do not disrupt the meeting.

So does scrum guide leave some room for other's presence like PO or stakeholders for inspection purpose? Sorry I could not find "participate" word in latest scrum guide revision for daily scrum, may be it was in older versions.

So does scrum guide leave some room for other's presence like PO or stakeholders for inspection purpose? Sorry I could not find "participate" word in latest scrum guide revision for daily scrum, may be it was in older versions.

@Love Gupta, I believe that's the understanding. The only thing the non-Development Team participants need to make sure is that they are participants only and not disturb or derail the purpose of the event. The team can later collaborate with the rest and/or take/answer questions from the other participants.

The way I always present it is that the Daily Scrum is for the Development Team to discuss their progress so far and plan progress until their next gathering.  If anyone else wants to observe in order to increase their knowledge of what is taking place, they are free to do so.  But they only observe, they do not interact and as the Scrum Master I ensure that doesn't happen. If an observer asks something like "Can you repeat that?" I'll stand quietly.  But if they start asking things like "Why aren't you doing this instead of that?" I step in and ask them to save that for how ever many minutes are left in the 15 minute time-box so it can be discussed more without interrupting the Development Team's planning session.  After the Development Team has completed their purpose the observers can discuss what they heard with the Development Team members in order to gain or provide clarity.  Sometimes these discussions will impact the plan that was put in place by the Development Team but the Development Team can re-plan if they feel the need. My experience has been that the more often re-planning becomes needed, the more the Development Team will start to communicate throughout the day with the observers and it become less of an occurrence.  Which also means that the communication is getting better and no one can say that is a bad thing. 

I think this post is quite old! 

As per the Scrum Guide 2017 US, the PO and SM can join the scrum meeting, however the Development team is MUST participant to conduct this meeting where all of them track the total work remaining:

Daily Scrums improve communications, eliminate other meetings, identify impediments to development for removal, highlight and promote quick decision-making, and improve the Development Team’s level of knowledge.

At any point in time in a Sprint, the total work remaining in the Sprint Backlog can be summed. The Development Team tracks this total work remaining at least for every Daily Scrum to project the likelihood of achieving the Sprint Goal. By tracking the remaining work throughout the Sprint, the Development Team can manage its progress.

Based on guide 2020 this event is for the developers of the scrum team but it is possible that the scrum master or the product owner to participate to this event.

the guide says "If the Product Owner or Scrum Master are actively working on items in the Sprint Backlog, they participate as Developers.",can someone provide me  more clarifications about this condition ?

below my quick analysis: 

what i think about PO who attend the DS:

the product owner can participate if he has an important information to share about an active items in the sprint backlog

the developers need the PO because they would like to have more clarifications about an active items in the sprint backlog

what i think about SM who attend the DS

the developers need a scrum master for impediments that cannot resolve and prevent their progress toward a sprint goal.

the scrum master need to share informations about something requested by the developers that help them to achieve a sprint goal 

thank you in advance

Hi,



as is the beginning of the topîc, the DS the word participate is the key.

PO and SM should not globally participate in DS except if they are Dev, and in this case they particiapte as Dev. 

However, they could attend DS. 



if PO has an important information, exceptionnaly, that could modify the whole DS, of course he should speak. But my question is why didn't he speaks before ? so that DS has the imput ? Except from that, no don't let PO take important things here all the time. The DS is a formal event for Devs.

If there's a need to clarify item only during DS, to quote Ian Mitchell on another post : what does it tell you about collaboration PO with Dev ?



For your SM part, why talking the SM should speak about impediments during DS ? can't it be made outside ?

For the informations, why should it be during DS ? aren't there other opportunities fro SM to communicate with Dev ?

 

This question keeps coming up; it did for me today, and it's frustrating that the question "Can anyone attend the daily scrum, is replied with the usual repeating of the guide "...it's for the developers, only they participate.." and "... the presence of anyone else, especially managers and PO would disrupt it.."  thus causing loss of transparency and cause negative outcomes. I disagree and wholeheartedly agree with Jill Graves simple and straightforward answer  viz.  anyone can attend as long as only those delivering value (aka Devs) actively participate, unless invited to contribute. If the team are wary of vistors , or if visitors interrupt and influence then I would say you have surfaced a problem in your team or organisation, take courage and deal with the root cause of the problem my friends.

There is nothing in the Scrum Guide stating that others cannot attend, just that it is an event for Developers of the Scrum Team. 

Developers can select whatever structure and techniques they want, as long as their Daily Scrum focuses on progress toward the Sprint Goal and produces an actionable plan for the next day of work. If their structure includes not having management or others attend, then that should be respected.

Anyone can attend daily Scrum. Only developers(not scrum team members but just developers)  participate( i.e. talk) at daily scrum. All others can speak only if invited to talk.

Period.

This is not a matter of debate,this is foundation of scrum.

"...it's for the developers, only they participate.." and "... the presence of anyone else, especially managers and PO would disrupt it.."  thus causing loss of transparency and cause negative outcomes.

@Chris, I realize you don't believe that to be true and are only stating what others say.

The Scrum Guide has evolved over the years and the wording has changed.  However, many companies that spent a lot of money on developing a business around providing products or services for Scrum have not evolved with those changes.  And unfortunately, some of the people that "learned Scrum" have not kept up with the updates either or even validated whether they "learned" it correctly. The statement you made is indicative of this.  The first part of the statement is actually from the Scrum Guide, but the second part has never been in the Scrum Guide as far as I know.

For as long as I have been involved with Scrum, the Scrum Guide has conveyed that the Daily Scrum (not the Daily Standup) has been an event for the Developers to plan the work they will do until the next Daily Scrum occurs.  It has never been a status meeting. It isn't a place where everyone answers 3 questions.  It is a place for conversation to occur between the people doing the work where any new information is discussed and a plan of work is defined. Anyone can be nearby listening (or in the video call with today's remote workforce) but they are there to gain insights, not to influence direction.  If the Developers want some information from the observers, they can ask them to provide it.  But given that the Daily Scrum is timeboxed to 15 minutes, those type of conversations are usually something that occurs after the timebox has expired or the Developers feel that they have completed their planning. 

Another thing I want to point out is that the Daily Scrum is not the only time that the Developers should communicate during the day.  There should be a continuous dialog between the Developers where information, ideas, suggestions are conveyed.  So, one of the "plans" from the Daily Standup could be for one of the developers to discuss something with the Product Owner and bring that information back to the rest of the Developers. The Developers could discuss contingent plans based upon expected feedback from the Product Owner in the Daily Scrum.