Sprint Zero is NOT a part of Scrum. You will not find it in
the Scrum Guide or any Scrum Certification Course. Sprint Zero is an anti-pattern.
So where did it come from? People that have little
understanding of Scrum but LOTS of Waterfall experience must have come up with this term.
A “Sprint 0” clearly does not deliver a potentially
releasable product. In fact it perpetuates the Waterfall mindset of Big Up Front Analysis
and Planning. It is almost identical to what most of us remember
as “gathering requirements” before a project. I cannot emphasize enough
how “anti-agile” this concept is. Does that mean we don’t put together a
Product Vision and a backlog before we start Sprinting? No. Of course not. But
we do it BEFORE we start Sprinting. If we want to eliminate the waterfall
mindset, we need to start by eliminating the concept of a “planning Sprint” or
a Sprint 0. Plan all you want. Just don’t call it a “Sprint”. Clearly, it is
not. Don’t just take my word for it, you can consult Mike Cohn, the Scrum Alliance, Alex Ballarin Latre, and the Scrum Guide.
“A Sprint 0 is the name often
given to a short effort to create a vision and a rough product backlog which
allows creating an estimation of a product release… that activity does not meet the definition of a Sprint in
Scrum, so it is better not to call it so.” - Alex Ballarin Latre
“Sprint zero is usually claimed as necessary because there
are things that need to be done before a Scrum project can start. For example,
a team needs to be assembled. That may involve hiring or moving people onto the
project. Sometimes there is hardware to acquire or at least set up. Many
projects argue for the need to write an initial product backlog (even if just
at a high level) during a sprint zero.
One of the biggest problems with having a sprint zero is
that it establishes a precedent that there are certain sprints or sprint types
that have unique rules. Teams doing a sprint zero, for example, will dispense
with the idea of having something potentially shippable at the end of that
sprint. How can they have something potentially shippable after all if the goal
of the sprint is to assemble the team that will develop the product?” – Mike
Cohn, https://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/blog/sprint-zero-a-good-idea-or-not
Some "Reasons" given to justify a Sprint Zero:
Some "Reasons" given to justify a Sprint Zero:
[we need some upfront] "planning, product
backlog setup, and design. This is my favorite, as it clearly indicates two
things:
- Someone is finding it hard to move away from Waterfall.
- The organization is finding it difficult to give up control and empower the team.
Introducing a long Sprint Zero at the start and a long validation
at the end helps keep the love for Waterfall alive. In addition, it hinders the
effectiveness of Scrum.
If Waterfall works for you, then by all means, you should
use Waterfall. This article focuses on teams that follow the Scrum rituals but
keep the Waterfall soul…
planning, product backlog setup, and design
is a proxy for "big design up front" (BDF). In Agile we try to stay
away from that. Often, an associated symptom will be a very hierarchical
organization, thus preventing the Scrum team from being really empowered.
Personnel who are most active in Sprint Zero may be
different from those most active in other sprints.
The Sprint Zero leaders will "guide" the team
through sprints but may not feel bound by the time and other constraints that
the rest of the team has.
This creates a two-level organization instead of the flat
one that Scrum promotes. A two-level organization tends to follow a
task-assignment and status-reporting culture, instead of a mind-set of
ownership and delivering value.
Scrum believes that every sprint
should deliver potentially usable value. None of the above Sprint Zero items
produce any value for the customer. They cannot be demoed.”
In other words, there is no valid reason for a Scrum Team to
have a Sprint 0. It is for people who cannot let go of the Waterfall mentality
and/or do not fully understand Scrum. As a coach that has been practicing Scrum
since 2004, I can tell you there is no need – and plenty of reasons against –
creating a “Sprint 0” and calling it Scrum.
