-1

Currently at my company three people take part in the annual performance evaluation of a software developer:

  • the developer,
  • product owner from the scrum team of the developer,
  • head of software development (line manager).

There isn't any 360-degree review system. Additionally, scrum masters usually are asked for written feedback of devs as an input for performance evaluation.

As far as I see in the Scrum Guide, PO, SM and devs are part of the scrum team and:

Within a Scrum Team, there are no sub-teams or hierarchies.

Does giving this reviewer role to PO and/or SM contradict this? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this performance evaluation scheme? As a scrum master is there anything I should do about this?

p3m5
  • 19

1 Answers1

6

A scrum master is a “servant leader”. They are not a manager. Letting them take on managerial duties erodes trust and corrupts the role.

A scrum masters duties include facilitating meetings, ensuring scrum processes are followed, and removing blockers. Evaluating performance is not one of them. Nor should it be.

Within a Scrum Team, there are no sub-teams or hierarchies.

This is correct. Management shouldn’t prefer one team members feed back over any other.

If you want a scrum team to be self organizing then stop organizing it.

But, as the scrum master you’re the expert on doing scrum correctly. You have a duty to uphold the ideals. Don’t just give them lip service. Find an effective way to stop this before it harms your team.

candied_orange
  • 119,268