The first diagram shows the circular states that represent the different levels of team maturity, with some examples of what demonstrates that level of maturity.
The second diagram highlights the fact that the team can only ever be as good as it’s constituent parts. Or in fact, as good as it’s lowest common denominator! In other words, if you have one particularly weak team member, it is going to hold the whole team back. This reinforces why the circular maturity model is so important – any change to the team can have dramatic effects on the overall team maturity.
The model isn’t scientific and doesn’t go into a lot of detail. It won’t tell you how to measure maturity or what you need to do to change it. It serves a single purpose; encouraging you to think about the maturity of your team. It will hopefully help you understand what you need to change and how fragile a team’s maturity can be.
This still needs a lot of work, I realise that. I’m deliberately publishing it quickly and soon after the conference in order to try and get a bit of feedback before evolving it further.
What have I changed from the original Scrum Master Maturity model that inspired this proposal?
- Crucially, it’s a circular model. It’s not a timeline. This represents the fact that the team never stands still. The team always changes. New people will join with different levels of experience and new ideas and, of course, people will leave. It is important to realise that you are constantly moving around this circle as your team evolves. There is no start and end state.
- I’ve extended the model to incorporate the team as well as the Scrum Master and also show the relationships between the two.
- I’ve simplified some of the text and made it a bit less ‘wordy’!
You can see the original model that inspired this work below. Full credit to the original author of that model, Ángel Medinilla.