Shu: So, we need a Scrum Master(SM) on project Z
Ri: Are you sure you need a SM?
Shu: The other one left….So we need someone to take care of the team and make sure the project will be ok…so yes.
Ri: Hmmm
Shu: What?
Ri: Isn’t that too restrictive, just a SM?
Shu: What do you mean? It’s a Scrum team, so we need a SM since the other one left.
Ri: Yes, but you also need a person to make sure that things will be ok, a person you can contact when things go wrong
Shu: Yes, a SM
Ri: Don’t you feel a divergence?
Shu: Divergence?
Ri: When you say “SM” and to “make sure the project is ok”, you practically define how the project should always be managed. Aren’t you limiting what she/he should do, although you want much more?
Shu: Its Scrum. Its clear/standard stuff. Everyone knows what to do and what to expect.
Ri: And what will happen when ontology changes? What will be her/his epistemological response? Can you be more clear in your need?(1)
Shu: Ha? Why did you use those words?
Ri: Because of neuroscience. By using those words I tried to activate different neural patterns so maybe you will see things differently. Look, its simple: ontology – a type of system; ontologies – different types of systems. Epistemology – how we know stuff. (1)
Shu: So I need someone to take care of the project but who is able to play also the SM role when applicable or whatever. To be aware of the different ontologies, to transcend them.
Ri: Are you sure? I’m kidding. Its better. At least you tried to understand what you need, and you also started to challenge what you know and what you need to know about a SM.
(1) Dave Snowden, “Multi-ontology sense making; a new simplicity in decision making”: http://cognitive-edge.com/articles/multi-ontology-sense-making-a-new-simplicity-in-decision-making/
(2) Alistair Cockburn, “Shu Ha Ri”: http://alistair.cockburn.us/Shu+Ha+Ri