I'm a Certified ScrumMaster. BFD.*

{ *Actually so is my brother, and he’s a freakin’ marketing guy… }

While I believe that the ScrumMaster 'certification' program had a hand in driving the early adoption of agile methods over the past several years, I also believe that it now needs to evolve into a more hard-core certification, as it's doing more harm than good.

First of all, a disclaimer to protect the innocent:
The 2-day CSM class I attended awhile back was extremely well presented, promoted the latest implementation of Scrum for software projects (e.g. incorporation of certain XP concepts, practices and terminology), and had some great exercises that helped illustrate the core fundamentals.  I left with renewed (& new) knowledge and energy.

Speaking of the class, I would guess that at most a third of the attendees had any prior experience with, or knowledge of, the practical application of agile methods (for argument's sake, let's assume that you & I were in that group – I like to think I have a clue).  But for the remaining two thirds, I was amazed to find that this was quite obviously a first introduction to scrum and agile practices, from which they walked away excited but over-stimulated and ill-prepared to fulfill the critical role of ScrumMaster on even the smallest teams, let alone help drive change within an organization.  Think deer-in-headlights, and you've got the picture.

Why is this a problem?
It's a problem because they also walked away as Certified ScrumMasters.

A Certified Master of Scrum.

{Wow, how cool.  I've never been certified (certifiable, yes...), let alone as a master of anything.}

Ok, so I do realize that it's an unfortunate combination of the name of the role and the term 'certified'.  That being said, it nevertheless implies to others that this person is certified as having total mastery, not as a slightly-informed novice.  Now if that were the end of it, no harm done, but the problem really manifests itself when they take that shiny new credential back to their team/organization.  Having PMPs reconstituted as 'Certified ScrumMasters' on staff instills a false sense of confidence in the team's ability to go it alone when transitioning to scrum/agile from their historical, ingrained, less-than-agile processes & practices.  And if left to themselves they will flail and fail, the team will quickly lose momentum & confidence, and Scrum/agile methods will ultimately suffer for it.

Why do I really care?
Aside from making CSMs that actually have a clue look like crap, and devaluing the certification in general, it threatens the positive, healthy adoption of scrum & agile methods.  I've experienced the effects of this firsthand on more than a few occasions, and more often recently.
Agile methods have quickly come into vogue, and enterprises of all sizes are feeling the pressure to become 'agile' as quickly as possible.  One by-product of the 'agile rush' is that we have prospects & customers that I would not have expected to run into for years to come (which is good for us).  In speaking with teams about how to most effectively implement our product, we often get into discussions about their processes and transition to an agile process.  In response to “Are you working with anyone from a coaching/mentoring perspective?” you get the “No, but we've got a whole whack of ScrumMaster's, so we're good to go.”  That scares me - a lot.

I'm not saying that they're all in the lower two thirds of my class, but based on the certification 'criteria' for a ScrumMaster these days, the odds are not good.

So, what to do?
Make it a certification with some real substance:

• Have some real pre-reqs: relevant experience and an assessed level of knowledge about scrum & agile methods
• Incorporate a practicum of sorts
• Actually evaluate knowledge & practical experience, preferably via interview vs. written

When drafting this I was discussing with a friend and he pointed me to a post by Mike Griffiths from earlier this year, in which he compares CSM with other project mgmt certifications, and has a more detailed treatment of comparable recommendations (The Certification Debate).  I'd also recommend an 'agile bandwagon'-related post of his from yesterday: The Rise, Fall & Rediscovery of Agile Methods.

As it stands today, the CSM program is a fairly hollow certification.  Pay the tuition, sit through a couple days of class, and you're in.  And while I realize there's quite the CSM training industry taking advantage of the current program (which I just might be pissing off), I would encourage those that continue to milk it to take a step back and consider whether they're doing more harm than good.

I think it's time for a bit of a refactoring.  Let's hear what you think.

Comments

[Shane Schulte]

Couldn't agree with you more and precisely why I'm not in a huge rush to become certified.

I've been told that to take the PMP exam, you need to provide a detailed history of your experiences and accomplishments.

I'm not interested in this certification either. I think the PMP can limit the perception of ones abilities. PMPs tend to follow the letter on PMBOK, and I think this is a flaw.

In the same manner, agile can be exercised poorly. I have seen traditional project managers, ones trained in task management, read a book on agile and then attempt to implement the theory like it was the 10 commandments. "That's not scrum, it says right here on page 84 that were supposed to do this..." Agile project management is more like Psalms. Ken Schwaber's book is written as a collection of stories that we can learn from and apply in a way that will help us to deliver better software faster.

I think the certification could be better. I'd like to see it based on results. If you can apply the principles in the real world and deliver results, and help to educate others in similar pursuits, that to me is a Certified Scrum Master.

[Paul Ellarby]

As much as I hate to say it, I totally agree. I have been practicing Agile, and Scrum in particular, for several years, both for clients and in my own software development company. I have decided to "get certified" simply because it is expected - I often consult on Scrum to clients, and am finding more and more that I am hearing "we have a certified Scrum Master on staff - are they more qualified than you". Unfortunately, when I talk about the project with this Scrum Master, I inevitably find the daily scrum is running 45 to 60 minutes, there are no user stories, tracking of backlog items is only done in Excel, and there are no visual aids in the scrum room. The good side of this is that it is easy to make a huge impact in the project very quickly!

Maybe it is time to refactor, and limit the Scrum Master certification to a select few, as we do the designation "Certified Scrum Practitioner".

[matt]

I find these classes are extremely useful when I am coaching new teams. The pattern I typically follow is to start a team (I typically get the larger teams - 10-15 folks) off with a level setting day or two of Intro to Agile and then coach through development for a couple of weeks. After that time, I identify someone on the team who is best suited to becoming the next scrum master and I send them to a CSM class somewhere, preferably taught by someone I know so I know what they are going to be taught. I find value in this because they get a second take on the material and can see that I am not making this stuff up on my own. It helps to cement practices and dispel misunderstanding and occasionally I learn something new that my associates with the certificates are being taught.

the certificate is meaningless. The knowledge is valuable. Having them take the CSM class means to me that the instructors started from a common set of slideware, though it doesn't actually guarantee that the instructors have ever actually coached an actual project.

The difference between the PMP and the CSM is that with the PMP, you know the individual has lead a program (though you don't know if it was successful). With the CSM, all you know is that they took a 2 day course.

Don't think of it as a level of knowledge, but rather as an level of exposure.

[Dave McMillin]

I agree that certification does not mean you can provide value. I have seen PMPs that could not plan or lead a project but got the certification. I have seen someone with a college degree in computer science have to be bailed out by someone without a degree but alot more know-how.

After 25 years in IT a title means nothing to me. The certification only shows me that someone has a desire to work with Scrum. Sometimes that desire and drive is enough to get them to learn more, keep trying if they fail and move the organization to a better place.

[Software Maestro]

Is the Scrum certification game just a ruse to bilk money out of the marketplace? Of course.

You should check out my blog for many informative XP articles including "Certified Scrum Witch Doctor" and "Scrum Master Jar Jar"

Softare Maestro