Scrum Master Ellen wrote me about a problem with running out of time during retrospectives:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI have a team that is quite elaborate in their retrospectives \nespecially in the gathering data and insights part. Perfect, but this \nleaves less time for deciding what to do and transforming problems we \nface into action. Do you have suggestions on how to keep the teams \nfocused on only the really important things they want to fix in the next\n sprint? The thing I try now is to minimize the number of post-its each \nperson adds, but I would love to have some other suggestions.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Yep, I definitely know that problem quite well. As I facilitate short retros (45-90 minutes) time is always an issue. Even small teams can come up with a multitude of topic ideas. And the more topics a team suggests, the fewer it can actually talk about.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Regarding minimizing stickies, there are at least 3 different ways to do it, all with their own trade-offs:<\/p>\n\n\n\n A) Give only very little time to write down topics B) Limit the number of stickies to write (\u201cWrite 3 stickies with your most important topics\u201d) C) After writing, tell people to go through their stickies and only keep a certain amount (\u201cPlease count your stickies. If you\u2019ve got more than 5, only keep the 5 most important ones and discard the others\u201d) [Z) You or the team set the topic beforehand and only explore aspects of this limited scope – Completely valid option if there’s an “obvious” topic to tackle]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Between options A-C, I use C most often but choose depending on the team. I pick the way I think they can best live with.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Alternatively, you can try to shorten the time that people take to present their topics. By 1) making them aware of the time problem and 2) intervening whenever people dig into a problem pre-maturely and start discussing instead of moving on to introduce the next sticky.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In my context (mature teams, very short retros of 60min every 2 weeks) \u201cGather data\u201d is strictly for broadcasting: Everybody hangs up their sticky ideas, says one sentence per sticky and that\u2019s it. Clarifying questions are okay, but no going into detail. Participants are great at reigning themselves in, when they go too deep into a topic. Everybody is used to postponing until after dot-voting and then discuss the agreed-upon topics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s certainly learned behaviour. I\u2019ve recently started to freelance on the side and now sometimes introduce retrospectives in other companies that are new to it. I noticed how easily participants get into details before it is clear, which topics are shared concerns. I stepped in a number of times. That\u2019s when I realised how rarely (if ever) this happens “at home”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One way team members can help each other stay on track is with Jeff Patton\u2019s Cups<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hopefully, some of these ideas help you carve out more time for the important topics 🙂<\/p>\n\n\n\n PS: Now I wonder what a \u201cnormal\u201d amount of topics per retro is. Across several teams I found we typically cover 2-3 topics in a 45-75 minute retro.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How many is \u201cnormal\u201d in your retros? And how long are those retros?<\/p>\n\n\n Scrum Master Ellen wrote me about a problem with running out of time during retrospectives: \u201cI have a team that is quite elaborate in their retrospectives especially in the gathering data and insights part. Perfect, but this leaves less time for deciding what to do and transforming problems we face into action. Do you have … <\/p>\n
\nCon: Stresses some people<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nCon: Gives some people analysis paralysis<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Con:\u00a0People\u00a0have\u00a0to\u00a0throw\u00a0away\u00a0some\u00a0of\u00a0their\u00a0work<\/p>\n\n\n\nPS: Did you know there's a Retromat eBook Bundle? Ready-made retrospective plans for beginners and all activities from Retromat for experienced facilitators. Check out the Retromat books<\/a><\/strong><\/h3>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"