LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.
Select Accept to consent or Reject to decline non-essential cookies for this use. You can update your choices at any time in your settings.
I used to think Agile meant moving fast. Deliver quickly, check the box, done, right? Turns out, that’s a trap.
I’ve seen teams sprint toward deadlines, only to realize halfway that the solution they built didn’t really solve the problem.
Frustration all around, and a lot of wasted effort.
That’s when it clicked for me: Agile isn’t about speed it’s about adaptability.
What helped our team was small, practical shifts:
👉Checking in with stakeholders regularly instead of assuming we got it right.
👉 Reviewing each sprint to see what actually delivered value, not just what was finished.
👉 Adjusting priorities based on real feedback, not just timelines.
Speed can feel impressive, but adaptability builds products that actually stick.
Agile gives you a framework to learn, adjust, and deliver consistently, not to race against the clock.
Have you ever experienced a time when moving fast backfired? I’d love to hear how you balanced speed and adaptability in your work.
#Agile#ProductManagement#Adaptability#ContinuousImprovement#Leadership#SoftwareDevelopment
🚨 Agile isn't dead — but we’ve definitely lost the plot.
We’ve turned Agile into a toolset rather than a mindset.
✔️ Daily standups? Check.
✔️ Sprints? Check.
✔️ Jira boards? Overflowing.
But what about actual agility?
❌ Teams still waiting weeks for decisions.
❌ Value delivery getting buried under status updates.
❌ Fear of failure leading to endless documentation and no experiments.
Agile was meant to make us faster, smarter, and more responsive to change.
Instead, many organizations now use “Agile” as a process cage — rigid, bloated, and fear-driven.
The result? Delivery slows down. Teams burn out. Customers don’t see value.
💡 The truth: Agile didn’t fail. We misused it. We misunderstood it. We made it about control, not outcomes.
It’s time to stop doing Agile and start being Agile again.
#Agile#TechLeadership#DigitalTransformation#ProductDelivery#AgileMindset#ModernEngineering#SoftwareDevelopment#LeanThinking
Let’s Talk About Sprints. Grab Your Pitchforks.
Sprints are central to Scrum. They're not just "a container for all other events" - they’re "the heartbeat" of the framework.
Sprints are "fixed-length events of one [calendar] month or less" that "may be considered a short project."
Someone recently asked me my opinion. I said I think sprints may be doing more harm than good.
Yes, they offer structure. Great for new teams. Like training wheels. Or scaffolding.
Yes, they make work feel organized. Great for disorganized teams.
Yes, they force planning (and hopefully prioritization). That’s useful.
And, yes, they’re easy to teach and learn. Nice for a quick start.
But for many teams, sprints are a lousy fit for how work actually happens in their context.
Hear me out...
1) False Deadlines
Sprints create artificial urgency. Teams rush to "finish" by the last day, whether the work is truly done or not. That leads to cut corners, half-baked features, or tech debt and waste.
2) Broken Flow
Deep, meaningful work needs uninterrupted focus. Sprints break that focus like clockwork - every week or two. Plan. Demo. Retro. Repeat. It’s a rhythm that can ironically interrupt real flow.
3) Arbitrary Timeboxing
Complex work doesn’t neatly conform to 1- or 2-week chunks. So teams slice stories, fudge forecasts, or roll things over - just to maintain a cadence that ultimately doesn’t mean much.
4) Hollow Goals
In theory, sprint goals guide the team. In practice, they’re often vague, forced, or written post-hoc to justify what’s already in the sprint backlog.
5) Masked Problems
Velocity looks like math, but it's often a nonsense number that hides reality. Spillover. Dependencies. Gaming. A number trending up isn’t always progress.
6) Process Overhead
Planning, reviews, and retros aren’t inherently bad - until they become empty rituals. Done 26 times a year, they can waste serious time and money. Why not plan when it’s needed? Retro when it matters? Demo when there’s something to share?
7) Bad for Innovation
Real discovery is messy and nonlinear. Insight doesn’t arrive on a fixed interval. Sprints incentivize small, safe, and shippable over breakthrough or bold.
8) Process Theater
Rituals become performance. Stand-ups drift into status meetings. Reviews turn into slide decks. Everyone’s "doing Agile," but no one’s improving.
9) Less Responsive
Ironically, sprints can limit agility. When priorities shift mid-sprint, teams either break the sprint (chaos) or defer the change (delay). Continuous flow handles change better.
Look, sprints aren’t evil; but they’re also not sacred.
If your team is succeeding with sprints and Scrum - great. Keep doing what works.
But if you’re constantly sprinting and never improving, ask why.
If every sprint feels like a reset with no real progress, maybe it’s not your people, but your system.
Agility is about adapting, not repeating.
Don't worship the timebox. Ask yourself if your sprints are killing your flow.
🤔 Are we just claiming to be #agile❓
⚠️ Running stand-ups, building in sprints, and working on user stories do not necessarily make us an agile team! 🚧
🚩 There are so many wrong practices, claimed to "simplify" processes, that are actually moving us away from best practices and risking project/product success.
You're NOT truly agile if you're:
⏰ Using hours/days for story points (instead of relative estimation)
📶 Failing to prioritize your work (e.g., Must have, Should have, etc.)
📚 Not actively managing your backlog (no regular refinement/grooming)
📉 Not monitoring burndown/burnup charts (for progress)
📝 Writing insufficient Acceptance Criteria (or not validating them)
♻️ Skipping lessons learned sessions (retrospectives)
⚙️ Tools like Agile Board and Visual Task Board in ServiceNow and Scrum Board and Kanban Board in #Jira can help, but they're only the enabler.
🧑🏫 You need to build the mindset in your people and embed the principles in your processes. Everything goes together.
🗺️ Where are you in your Agile journey? How do you ensure your tools are enabling and not just masking? 💬
#ServiceNow#BestPractices#AgileDevelopment#Scrum#VTB#AgileBoard#ScrumBoard#KanbanBoard#AgileMindset
“Using agile for safety-critical systems will get people killed.” Wrong.
The misunderstanding comes from a flawed assumption: that iteration means “just do stuff and see what happens.” It doesn't. Iteration means taking calculated risks early in development to achieve a higher safety at production faster and with lower cost.
Each step is planned to work the first time—though the program as a whole might not work perfectly at first.
Even teams that take an agile approach fall into a common trap when designing safety-critical systems: They assume they need to design everything perfectly from the start.
This assumption is understandable. When people look at the process and rigour needed when going from Crew Dragon V3 to V4, they assume the same level of detail existed in Dragon V1. It didn’t.
Early prototypes should have only a handful of requirements (e.g. thrust, flight, power on/off). With each iteration, teams add more fidelity, data, and proof. By the time you reach a certified vehicle, you may have 10,000+ requirements.
That doesn’t mean you should *start* with 10,000.
The biggest mistake? Designing backward from regulations. Certification docs from the FAA don’t design aircraft.
Agile promised speed. So why do you feel slower than ever?
Agile was supposed to fix everything. Instead, you got:
-More stand-ups, more retros, more planning. Less actual progress.
-More Jira tickets, more reports. Still no real visibility.
-More Agile playbooks, more coaches. Still no real agility.
Your teams move fast. Your system doesn’t. That’s the problem.
-More features do not mean more value.
-More meetings do not mean better collaboration.
-More Agile processes do not mean faster delivery.
Sound familiar? Your teams sprint. Your work doesn’t.
Fix It Now
1. Stop Overloading Your Teams: Optimise for Flow, Not Busyness
Busy teams do not mean productive teams.
If your teams are at full capacity, your system has no agility.
Think of a motorway. If every lane is full, traffic stops. The same happens in your company.
Stop rewarding busyness. Measure value delivered.
2. Break the Bottlenecks That Slow You Down
Your teams move fast. But what about your approvals, governance, and handovers?
-Kill the blockers. Speed up the system.
-Reduce dependencies. Build cross-functional teams.
-Cut unnecessary approvals. Let teams decide.
-Align business and tech. No more mid-sprint chaos.
3. Stop Thinking in Projects. Start Thinking in Products.
Too many companies still treat Agile teams like short-term project teams.
If your teams are constantly restructured, you are just reorganising chaos.
-Agile is about continuous improvement, not temporary projects.
-Leaders demand predictable roadmaps instead of iterative learning.
Shift from project-driven to product-driven.
-Organise your teams around long-term products, not temporary projects.
-Measure success by business impact, not deadlines.
Agile Isn’t Broken. Your System Is.
Are you fixing teams, or fixing your system?
🚀 Agile: Beyond the Myths
Too often, we reduce Agile to just sprints, daily stand-ups, or sticky notes. While those are visible practices, they are only the tip of the iceberg.
👉 What people think Agile is = ceremonies and tools.
👉 What Agile actually is = a mindset and a set of principles that drive continuous improvement, customer collaboration, value delivery, and adaptability.
True Agile is about:
✅ Cross-functional collaboration
✅ Iterative development and MVP delivery
✅ Continuous improvement (Kaizen)
✅ Stakeholder engagement and customer focus
✅ Technical practices like TDD, DevOps, and pair programming
✅ Empowering self-organizing teams
It’s not about following rituals for the sake of process—it’s about delivering value, managing risk, and building resilience in a changing world.
💡 If we only focus on the ceremonies, we miss the essence of Agile. The real transformation happens when organizations embrace the principles behind them.
What’s your experience—have you seen Agile mistaken for just “stand-ups and sprints”?
#Agile#Leadership#ContinuousImprovement#Scrum#AgileMindset#BusinessTransformation
90 percent of the Scrum teams I see in the real world aren't actually practicing Scrum at all.
This isn't an attack on anyone, it's just an observation about reality.
Most 'Scrum' Teams I meet;
Don't have a Product Goal.
Set either no Sprint Goal, or multiple Sprint Goals.
Don't have (or barely look at) a Definition of Done.
Do not have a real Product Owner whose decisions are respected.
Are not self-managing.
Are not cross-functional.
Do not produce a usable product increment at least once per sprint.
Do not demonstrate the outcome of their sprint to real stakeholders.
Worst of all..
They do not use the learnings from a sprint to inform the future product direction.
(and how could they, given everything else?)
The reality is that most 'Scrum teams' are practicing "ZSBMD".
Zombie Scrum by Management Decree.
They are going through the motions of a process they don't understand, to appease people who understand it even less.
We have to find a way to do better.
That doesn't mean you have to do scrum 'by the book'
But it does mean that you should have at least read the book before you decide there's nothing in there for you.
🚨 A Hard Truth: Sprint Goals Aren’t Optional
If your Sprint doesn’t have a Sprint Goal, you don’t have a Sprint. You have a two-week task list.
75% of the teams I start out working with don’t use Sprint Goals at all, or use them poorly.
👀 I hear the same excuse again and again: "But you don’t understand, we’re different."
The truth is you’re probably not so special.
Not to play Scrum Police, but the Sprint Goal is not optional.
Common impediments that stop teams from using Sprint Goals:
☠️ Missing a Product Goal. Without a north star, Sprint Goals have no direction.
☠️ Multiple products stuffed into one Product Backlog.
☠️ An uninformed Product Owner who hasn’t ordered the Product Backlog by cohesive PBIs.
☠️ Focus is impossible when Product Backlog items are randomly ordered.
☠️ A Product Owner who can’t say "no", who's an order taker instead of a value maximizer.
☠️ An organizational culture that prizes busyness and utilization over outcomes. Sprint Goals feel irrelevant when activity is valued more than impact.
Common misuses that weaken Sprint Goals:
❌ Writing the Sprint Goal as: "Complete 12 tickets this Sprint." That’s output, not outcome.
❌ Creating multiple goals strung together with AND. If everything is important, nothing is.
❌ Goals that are too vague or not tied to business value. Empty words give no clarity or purpose.
❌ Treating the Sprint Goal as a theme or label. "UI Sprint" or "Tech Debt Sprint" is not an outcome.
❌ Reusing the same Sprint Goal Sprint after Sprint. Signals stagnation, not progress.
Benefits of Sprint Goals:
- Focus. Prevents the team from scattering effort across unrelated tasks.
- Empiricism. Creates a meaningful way to inspect and adapt progress each Sprint.
- Purpose. Provides intrinsic motivation and gives the team a shared outcome.
- Alignment. Acts as a stepping stone toward the Product Goal and creates continuity across Sprints.
- Cohesion. Becomes the glue that binds a group of individuals into a real Scrum Team.
🔑 What the Product Owner can do:
- Ensure there is a clear Product Goal so Sprint Goals naturally flow from it
- Order Product Backlog items by cohesiveness
- Bring an objective for the Sprint into Sprint Planning
- Engage with stakeholders and say "no" when needed to protect focus
🔑 What the Scrum Master can do
- Teach the purpose and power of Sprint Goals
- Facilitate Sprint Planning to ensure a single, cohesive goal is defined
- Coach the Product Owner on different Product Backlog ordering techniques
- Call out weak or vague Sprint Goals and coach the team toward clarity.
👉 A team not working on a Sprint Goal isn't a team - they are a just a group of individuals.
What’s the worst Sprint Goal you’ve ever seen in action?
7 𝐒𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐬
A Sprint Retrospective is a crucial Scrum event for reflecting on the past sprint and identifying improvements. It promotes continuous growth, collaboration, and trust within the team. However, retrospectives can often become repetitive and lose effectiveness.
Let us understand the antipattern and solution.
7 Anti-patterns of Sprint Retrospective and Their Solutions
1️⃣ 𝐁𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐆𝐚𝐦𝐞
👉𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧: Team members use the retrospective to point fingers, leading to defensiveness and damaging trust.
👉𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Focus on collective responsibility by framing discussions around the question, "What could we, as a team, do better?" Encourage a blameless culture.
2️⃣ 𝐋𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧
👉 𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧: Retrospectives are rushed, with little thought given to the issues at hand.
👉𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Encourage team members to prepare ahead of time by collecting feedback throughout the sprint. The Scrum Master can use tools like surveys to gather insights in advance.
3️⃣ 𝐒𝐚𝐦𝐞 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞
👉𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧: Repeating the same retrospective format every sprint can lead to disengagement and routine behavior.
👉𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Vary the format using different activities (e.g., "Start, Stop, Continue" or "4Ls: Liked, Learned, Lacked, Longed for") to keep engagement high and discussions fresh.
4️⃣ 𝐅𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐎𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐨𝐧 𝐍𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬
👉𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧: The team focuses only on what went wrong, ignoring positive outcomes.
👉𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Include a celebration of successes to acknowledge what went well, thus creating a balanced discussion that motivates the team.
5️⃣ 𝐔𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐀𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐈𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐬
👉𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧: Teams leave the retrospective with vague or no actionable items, leading to no real improvements.
👉𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Ensure that the retrospective ends with specific, measurable, and actionable items. Assign owners and set deadlines to ensure accountability.
6️⃣ 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧
👉𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧: Trying to solve too many problems at once dilutes focus and leads to a lack of real progress.
👉𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Prioritize the most critical issues to address and focus on one or two major improvements per sprint.
7️⃣ 𝐒𝐤𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞
👉𝐀𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧: The team may skip retrospectives due to time constraints or because they feel no value is being gained.
👉𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Emphasize the importance of continuous improvement and make retrospectives a non-negotiable, protected event. Adjust the length if necessary but never skip it.
Addressing these anti-patterns helps teams maximize retrospectives, driving continuous improvement and enhanced performance.
Want to get more valuable content follow Jitendra Kumar#Scrum#Agile#SprintRetrospective