(Let the Light In)
✥ ✥ ✥
Your team depends on a hero who doesn’t want to, or who doesn’t have time for Developing in Pairs or Apprenticeship, but as the ScrumMaster you want all your team members to perform optimally according to their abilities.
A hero on a team can act like a busy parent who finds it easier to do things alone instead of help others to learn. The organization knows they can rely on the hero’s experience and will defer to him to get things done. So the hero will be very productive while the other team members work in the shade without the necessary light to grow. At the same time the hero risks to burn out.
The Scrum Team or ScrumMaster can ask the hero to develop a habit of letting other team members increase their responsibility for work, or even to take more risks, but often the behaviors are so much part of the hero’s identity or personality that such learning may not be an option.
Remove the hero from the team so the rest of the team can grow like flowers getting light after a big tree that fell in the storm.
✥ ✥ ✥
It is not an easy solution to implement. Management can be upset if they are close to the hero. The hero will be upset if he/she feels that it is a degradation. Productivity will go down in a period while the team is learning to take over.
In our experience, in a Danish company a team had a Scrum team member who did five times more work than any other team member — and didn’t have time to go to the Daily Scrum. After this productive team member was removed from the team the team’s velocity doubled. This is just one example out of many where the overall velocity in a Scrum team increases after having removed “a hero.”
It may be unpopular to remove an individual if the Product Owner has come to be dependent on him or her. That makes it harder to remove the disruptive individual. On the other hand, it also exposes that the team is vulnerable to losing a single individual, and that perhaps that the team should work harder on raising its “truck number” to reduce the risk of dependency on a single individual (see Moderate Truck Number).
Normally it is the ScrumMaster, as owner of process issues, who owns this issue. Good ScrumMasters will try to mitigate the problem by coaching the individual or by taking other measures short of removing the person from the team. However, in the end, it is the ScrumMaster who has the authority to remove a disruptive person from the team. A good ScrumMaster may decide what course of action to take after discrete consultation with other team members. If the individual causing the shade is the ScrumMaster him or herself, the rest of the Scrum Team has the power to dismiss the individual.
Quote from an interview with the ScrumMaster from a team that shrank from 20 to 5:
Those who wanted to try something else were allowed to leave the team. But sometimes there was an outcry when I presented it for the team. “Now we will die, we can’t do it. If he leaves we will have to give up” they said. I told them that I believed that the rest of the team will grow. If there is a strong architect then there will be a small flower behind him. When we cut down this tree just wait and see I believe that you will grow. And that is what I have seen happening.
This pattern goes along with Moderate Truck Number.
Letting everyone on the team share the work and have a sense of key contribution elevates Team Pride. Giving the key jobs to just one person, or having a team member who otherwise demoralizes the rest of the team, can destroy it.
In some cases there may be room elsewhere for the hero as a Solo Virtuoso.
Picture from: Pixabay (under CC0 license).