Who has the last say on adding a new developer?
My client asked who has the last say while evaluating the necessity and selection of a new developer.
I know that PO owns the budget and progress responsibility whereas developers has the last say on technical quality.
What is your idea?
thx for your comments:)
My advice is to put aside the notion of people having "the last say" and think in terms of their accountabilities instead.
What accountabilities are described in the Scrum Guide? Who does it assert ought to hold each other accountable as professionals?
I agree with @Ian Mitchell about "the last say". The Scrum Guide says this about the Scrum Team
Scrum Teams are cross-functional, meaning the members have all the skills necessary to create value each Sprint. They are also self-managing, meaning they internally decide who does what, when, and how.
If you truly have a self-managing team then there isn't a "last say" because it is a shared team decision.
Out of curiosity, what "client" is asking this and why? Is it because you have a time and materials contract with them instead of one that is focused on the value delivered?
When you say "evaluating the necessity", you can think of two perspectives: (1) add more skills to the team or (2) increase team's productivity. What is the point?
Adding more skills can be solved with training. Can't the team solve this for themselves?
Adding more developers can decrease performance in the short term, and if you have team problems that actually affect productivity, adding more developers can also escalate the problems.
I understand that it is a team's accountability in first step. If it became an impediment to the team do achieve the Sprint Goal, the lack of skills or the lack of people, SM should help.
There is no last say, because inspection and adaptation is a continuous process.
Adaptation becomes more difficult when the people involved are not empowered or self-managing. A Scrum Team is expected to adapt the moment it learns anything new through inspection.
A Scrum Team is self-managing and its members should be empowered to adapt, and then adapt again as more is learned. This includes adapting its membership, whenever appropriate to do so.
The ability to continuously adapt may liberate people to make more experimental changes.