Can sprint demo be held a day later?

Adeel,

The Sprint Review is a critical ceremony not only confirming that the accepted stories meet the Definition of Done (DoD), but also supporting the feedback loop into the team's offer for the next sprint.

- Were the Sprint Planning sessions for the next sprint still held in lieu of the missing Sprint Review?

- Was the duration of the next sprint impacted by 1 day while the team finished up the incomplete story?

- What was preventing the other sprint stories from being presented to the Product Owner in a Sprint Review?

I am assuming that the Product Owner was not consulted around either extending the sprint to allow the team to finish the story, or canceling the sprint demo. As a consequence of these actions, the relationship between the team and the PO was damaged.

This is one of many reasons why it is extremely important to enforce the sprint deadline. Extending the sprint by 1 day to allow for completion of a story should never be encouraged. An incomplete story at the end of a sprint is just that - incomplete. Perhaps the incomplete story should have been carried over to the next sprint. Not an ideal solution, but far better than what was actually executed.

Also, sprint lengths need to be fixed to support velocity metrics and forecast planning. What good is a velocity metric to both the team and the PO if sprint lengths are allowed to vary?

So, Scrum was violated in a number of areas. Use it as a learning experience. Work to repair the relationship with the PO. Ask the PO how they would like to manage the work done in the problem sprint.

Have the conversation to find out how to proceed. There are no magic bullets in Scrum, especially when the Scrum framework is not followed.

Inspection and adaptation can occur at any point in any sprint. A Sprint Review and a Sorint Retrospective are formal opportunities for this to happen at the end of a sprint, and should be observed, but there is nothing to stop a team from self-organizing informal sessions at a different point should this prove necessary.

Thank you guys for your time and insight. Really appreciated.

Few days back one Scrum team had similar problem. Their Sprint planning meeting was due. But the weather was pretty bad on that day and it was difficult for everyone to be at office for sprint planning. They postpone it to next day. What is your feedback on this Tim?

Soumya,

Assuming that by "everyone", you mean the team and the PO were unable to meet because of the weather, and so Sprint Planning (and the start of the next sprint) were delayed by 1 day.

My view of Scrum is that of a framework to support Agile, but sometimes there are impediments that occur that are simply out of our control. This weather situation happened to occur at the beginning of the sprint, but it could have occurred at any time during the sprint, with a similar capacity impact.

It is good that your team and PO were able to adjust quickly and keep the momentum moving forward. My advice would be for your team and PO to revisit the issue and brainstorm ways to mitigate it in the future. Software and access to support remote meetings is one way to manage inclement weather conditions.

The main difference that I see between your example and the original example is that your sprint length was not altered by choice, but by outside conditions, and you can try to address it (i.e. - continuous improvement) so that it doesn't reoccur.

Since the time box has expired so the Sprint was over, you should go into the sprint review with No demo. You can explain the situation to stakeholders and informing that Team will be arranging a mid-sprint demo.

Also sprint review is just a formal way for inspection and adoption, you can keep your demo anytime during the sprint.

The next day planning should plan team work for the remaining time of the sprint.

Since it is one-off the case and I don't expect the weather to be bad every other sprint, I would always recommend to have in-person sprint planning as compared to doing it remotely.