Just look at all those "scrum in the name only" or "we do it because it's in the scrum guide" teams. That's what I understand as "by the book."
If a team can't sensibly explain why they're doing a practice and what value it brings them or a broader organization it would be a clue.
If a team can't sensibly explain why they're doing a practice and what value it brings them or a broader organization it would be a clue.
Comments
As a matter of fact, I would consider very few adoptions of [any method] completely voluntary.
Also, as a rule of thumb, the bigger the org, the less volunteerism there would be.
Not everything we do has to be explainable from methodological perspective.
I may not give a damn about Scrum's methodological perspective and still understand why and how dailies give us value.
Again, it's not binary.
If that team doesn't know that someone AND what this something means to them, how can they explain value to your satisfaction? What I am trying to show is "why are you doing x" is primarily a social question.
E.g., the dailies give value to me and my team (because better synchronization, serendipitous help, whatever).
What does not automatically follow is methodological understanding of the whole Scrum.
Hell, I might have been coerced to do Scrum, and that's still true.