Scrum: Where Did It Come From?
By Laszlo Szalvay
Agile methods have boomed in influence and practice, as organizations of all sizes and types acknowledge that linear thinking won’t cut it in a complex business world. But what does it actually mean to be Agile? This three-part series explores the question, focusing on the most popular agile approach, Scrum.
In the first installment of this three-part series exploring the origins, current state and future of the agile methodology known as Scrum, the author describes the principles that shaped Scrum, and why they work.
Many would say the story of agile begins in 1995 when Jeff Sutherland and Ken Schwaber presented a formalized Scrum process at the International Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. For others, the movements defining moment was the creation of the Agile Manifesto in February 2001, in which Sutherland, Schwaber, Kent Beck, Alistair Cockburn, Jim Highsmith and Mike Beedle, among others, drafted a document that outlined the need for lightweight processes in modern software development. In essence, the Agile Manifesto served as a Declaration of Independence from the inflexibility of waterfall development.
With representatives of nascent agile methodologies on hand, including Extreme Programming, DSDM and Scrum, the group mapped out a paradigmatic shift in development that emphasized philosophy over concrete processes. That’s a critical distinction: Because agile practices mark such a dramatic departure from traditional, sequential models of development, teams and organizations must cultivate a deep understanding of agile’s principles to fully commit to its practices. Agile contains numerous subsets — each with its own distinct processes. Scrum, which is fast becoming the most popular agile method, is the focus of this series.
Scrum, an iterative and incremental approach to software development, is most often believed to be either a reaction to the rigidly linear school of waterfall development or a direct descendent of Lean Manufacturing, typified by Honda and Toyota’s work in the 1980s. And while Scrum’s relation to both of these disciplines is, to some extent, indisputable, Scrum — and other agile subsets — differs in that it sheds the belief that software development is based on the same mathematical and physical properties that govern more straightforward forms of architecture and construction. That is, automobile engineers at Honda or Toyota can base their designs on irrefutable, mechanical laws, allowing them to build automobiles with a high level of certainty of how they will perform in relation to velocity, speed, energy consumption, etc. Software design, on the other hand, is riddled with variables without physical properties; Scrum attempts to cope with this chaos by embracing it.
According to Sutherland, both Scrum and Lean actually emerged from complex adaptive systems theory, and he describes them as “complementary implementations of ways to deal with physical reality where things are often not linear, not simple, and not predictable.” Complexity theory tells us that, in nature, equilibrium is a precursor to death. That is, when a living system becomes static, it also becomes most vulnerable to extinction. However, a threat to the system pushes it closer to chaos, which incites it to self-organize and, consequently, yield higher levels of mutation and experimentation. When that occurs, the systems evolve in order to survive. But what does this have to do with Scrum?
In discussing the first Scrum a software team created at Easel Corporation in 1993, Sutherland, then vice president of the company’s Object Technology division, explains that all the practices we now identify as Scrum and Extreme Programming were firmly in place: pair programming, continuous integration, and cross-functional teams.
Sutherland also points to Scrum’s secret weapon for triggering hyper-productivity: “punctuated equilibrium.” Punctuated equilibrium is a theory of evolutionary biology, which asserts that most life forms remain static throughout their lives and that moments of evolution are rare and pronounced. Sutherland observed this phenomenon in the tension between the evolutionary Backlog, which is constantly updated and revised to reflect real world circumstances, and the static Sprint, a repeatable work cadence that provides teams with the stability to ignore the thrash of the real world.
In other words, the Scrum process replicates the alternating periods of upheaval and stability observed in punctuated equilibrium to lead team’s toward more highly evolved working behaviors. As Sutherland states, “When enough mutations occur in multiple parts of an organism, the system shifts to a higher plateau of functionality.”
Just as natural species that do not evolve will be eclipsed by predators, so too will static businesses be buried by those competitors that innovate. Certainly, it’s no revelation to describe a capitalist market as Darwinian. What is revelatory is that Scrum — by virtue of its iterative and incremental nature — mimics the biological instinct to survive through constant adaptation.
In fact, if Scrum has a mantra, it is “inspect and adapt.” Granted, Scrum can’t guarantee success, but it does force an organization’s management and stakeholders to assess progress and direction on an ongoing basis. That constant evaluation of threats, and the “mutations” they inspire position an organization to make the kind of strategic decisions that will help them survive.
Next: The State of Scrum — why is it flourishing?
Laszlo Szalvay is president and co-founder of Danube Technologies, which helps organizations transform to Scrum software development management practices. Danube first developed an internal tool to improve its own processes and then offered it free to the market. Building on its success, Danube has since introduced ScrumWorks Pro and created a services division, ScrumCORE. Today, more than 90,000 software professionals use ScrumWorks.
This article originally appeared in the online edition of Projects@Work on Thursday, September 25, 2008. To access it online, visit: http://www.projectsatwork.com/content/Articles/244946.cfm
Agile methods have boomed in influence and practice, as organizations of all sizes and types acknowledge that linear thinking won’t cut it in a complex business world. But what does it actually mean to be Agile? This three-part series explores the question, focusing on the most popular agile approach, Scrum.
In the first installment of this three-part series exploring the origins, current state and future of the agile methodology known as Scrum, the author describes the principles that shaped Scrum, and why they work.
Many would say the story of agile begins in 1995 when Jeff Sutherland and Ken Schwaber presented a formalized Scrum process at the International Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages, and Applications. For others, the movements defining moment was the creation of the Agile Manifesto in February 2001, in which Sutherland, Schwaber, Kent Beck, Alistair Cockburn, Jim Highsmith and Mike Beedle, among others, drafted a document that outlined the need for lightweight processes in modern software development. In essence, the Agile Manifesto served as a Declaration of Independence from the inflexibility of waterfall development.
With representatives of nascent agile methodologies on hand, including Extreme Programming, DSDM and Scrum, the group mapped out a paradigmatic shift in development that emphasized philosophy over concrete processes. That’s a critical distinction: Because agile practices mark such a dramatic departure from traditional, sequential models of development, teams and organizations must cultivate a deep understanding of agile’s principles to fully commit to its practices. Agile contains numerous subsets — each with its own distinct processes. Scrum, which is fast becoming the most popular agile method, is the focus of this series.
Scrum, an iterative and incremental approach to software development, is most often believed to be either a reaction to the rigidly linear school of waterfall development or a direct descendent of Lean Manufacturing, typified by Honda and Toyota’s work in the 1980s. And while Scrum’s relation to both of these disciplines is, to some extent, indisputable, Scrum — and other agile subsets — differs in that it sheds the belief that software development is based on the same mathematical and physical properties that govern more straightforward forms of architecture and construction. That is, automobile engineers at Honda or Toyota can base their designs on irrefutable, mechanical laws, allowing them to build automobiles with a high level of certainty of how they will perform in relation to velocity, speed, energy consumption, etc. Software design, on the other hand, is riddled with variables without physical properties; Scrum attempts to cope with this chaos by embracing it.
According to Sutherland, both Scrum and Lean actually emerged from complex adaptive systems theory, and he describes them as “complementary implementations of ways to deal with physical reality where things are often not linear, not simple, and not predictable.” Complexity theory tells us that, in nature, equilibrium is a precursor to death. That is, when a living system becomes static, it also becomes most vulnerable to extinction. However, a threat to the system pushes it closer to chaos, which incites it to self-organize and, consequently, yield higher levels of mutation and experimentation. When that occurs, the systems evolve in order to survive. But what does this have to do with Scrum?
In discussing the first Scrum a software team created at Easel Corporation in 1993, Sutherland, then vice president of the company’s Object Technology division, explains that all the practices we now identify as Scrum and Extreme Programming were firmly in place: pair programming, continuous integration, and cross-functional teams.
Sutherland also points to Scrum’s secret weapon for triggering hyper-productivity: “punctuated equilibrium.” Punctuated equilibrium is a theory of evolutionary biology, which asserts that most life forms remain static throughout their lives and that moments of evolution are rare and pronounced. Sutherland observed this phenomenon in the tension between the evolutionary Backlog, which is constantly updated and revised to reflect real world circumstances, and the static Sprint, a repeatable work cadence that provides teams with the stability to ignore the thrash of the real world.
In other words, the Scrum process replicates the alternating periods of upheaval and stability observed in punctuated equilibrium to lead team’s toward more highly evolved working behaviors. As Sutherland states, “When enough mutations occur in multiple parts of an organism, the system shifts to a higher plateau of functionality.”
Just as natural species that do not evolve will be eclipsed by predators, so too will static businesses be buried by those competitors that innovate. Certainly, it’s no revelation to describe a capitalist market as Darwinian. What is revelatory is that Scrum — by virtue of its iterative and incremental nature — mimics the biological instinct to survive through constant adaptation.
In fact, if Scrum has a mantra, it is “inspect and adapt.” Granted, Scrum can’t guarantee success, but it does force an organization’s management and stakeholders to assess progress and direction on an ongoing basis. That constant evaluation of threats, and the “mutations” they inspire position an organization to make the kind of strategic decisions that will help them survive.
Next: The State of Scrum — why is it flourishing?
Laszlo Szalvay is president and co-founder of Danube Technologies, which helps organizations transform to Scrum software development management practices. Danube first developed an internal tool to improve its own processes and then offered it free to the market. Building on its success, Danube has since introduced ScrumWorks Pro and created a services division, ScrumCORE. Today, more than 90,000 software professionals use ScrumWorks.
This article originally appeared in the online edition of Projects@Work on Thursday, September 25, 2008. To access it online, visit: http://www.projectsatwork.com/content/Articles/244946.cfm
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Scrum_Where Did It Come From.pdf | 151.79 KB |