Scrum = Communism (not)
I heard this three times already: “Scrum is Communism”. Two times from different fellow Software Architects and one time from a fellow Scrum Master (who probably heard it from a Software Architect or Lead Developer).
This statement is — in my humble opinion — far from the truth. Let’s have a quick look at what Communism is, and then move on:
Communism refers, first, to social-theoretical utopias based on ideas of social equality and freedom of all members of society, on the basis of common property and collective problem solving.
Second, based essentially on the theories of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels, and Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, the term stands for economic and political doctrines aimed at establishing a society free of domination and classless.
Third, it refers to movements and political parties (cf. Communist Party) that aim to convert societies to Communism or to put such doctrines into practice.
Fourth, as a foreign term distinct from the first meaning, it denotes systems of rule that have emerged from it. The most powerful of these reached its greatest extent with the Soviet Union and its allied Eastern bloc states as well as China during the Cold War. In some of these communist party dictatorships (real socialism), mass crimes occurred (such as the Great Terror in the Stalinist Soviet Union of the 1930s or the Maoist Cultural Revolution in the People’s Republic of China in the 1960s and 1970s). Most real socialist states collapsed around 1990. — wikipedia.org
The first meaning of Communism — with collective problem solving (collaboration during the sprint), common property (collective code ownership), and equality (probably in the estimation phase of requirements) in there might resonate with some Scrum Teams. The rest has nothing in common with Scrum.
Let’s not jump fences: Social equality is not given in Scrum Teams, nor is this intended by this framework. Collective code ownership introduced by XP (Extreme programming) doesn’t mean the code is common property. The code is owned by the organization of course and not by the employees. Collective Code Ownership only refers to everyone in a team is allowed to improve the code. Equality is given in a good team, but this only refers to equally being valued as a team member and not that any team would aim for the lowest common denominator of skills as the ultimate goal for all. Story Points or similar Wideband Delphi estimation methods also have been introduced by xP and not Scrum. As for collective problem solving — the collective, this is referring to certainly is larger than 6 +/-3 team members. Regarding freedom…well Scrum is still about complex work, isn’t it?
Scrum is not Communism
The was easy. Let’s have a look at, whether Scrum is Capitalist.
Capitalism refers on the one hand to a specific economic and social order, and on the other hand to an epoch in economic history. Its central characteristics are disputed in view of historical change and the numerous definitions of capitalism as well as ideological differences. In general, Capitalism is understood to be an economic and social order based on private ownership of the means of production and control of production and consumption via the market (market economy).
Other constitutive features mentioned are: accumulation (for some, the “heart”, main feature and guiding principle of Capitalism), “free wage labor” and the “pursuit of profit in the continuous, rational capitalist enterprise.” — wikipedia.org
Again some things in there might resonate with Scrum Teams: Control of production via the market, and continuous pursuit of profit. We have the Product Owner as representative of the market placed in the team, continuously and sustainable searching for opportunities and ordering the backlog by business value. Long term business value generation is the ultimate goal of a Scrum Team. Scrum Teams might even be regarded as small self-organized profit centers. Scrum — in contrast to existing implementations of capitalism — is also completely silent on how the business value=wealth generated is supposed to be spread under the team members or within the organization. They do not pretend to know. I regard this as a little bit more honest. Capitalism still is based on the private ownership of the means of production — and the Scrum Team really owns only their skills.
Scrum is not Capitalism
So, Scrum is neither Capitalism nor Communism. What could the colleagues have meant with “Scrum is Communism” then? Maybe they wanted to say “Scrum is Democracy”.
Democracy (ancient Greek δημοκρατία dēmokratía “rule of the people of the state”, from δῆμος dḗmos “people of the state” and κράτος krátos “violence, power, rule”) today refers to forms of rule, political orders or political systems in which power and government emanate from the people (popular rule).
The people participate either directly (direct Democracy) or through the selection of decision-making representatives (representative Democracy) in all decisions that affect the general public. In democratic states and political systems, the government emerges from the people through political elections. Since power is exercised by the general public, freedom of speech and freedom of the press are essential to the formation of political will. Other important features of a modern democracy are free and equal elections, the majority or consensus principle, protection of minorities, acceptance of a political opposition, separation of powers, constitutionality, and protection of fundamental, civil, and human rights. This liberal value base, which as such cannot be touched even by majority decision, also distinguishes it significantly from an ochlocracy, people’s republic or tyranny of the majority. — wikipedia.org
The majority or consensus principle and freedom of speech might resonate with Scrum Teams and other good Teams alike. Maybe the Tyranny of the majority might be, what the Software Architect colleagues meant by “Scrum is communism” after having been overruled in a Scrum event. Maybe a sub-structure they grew fond of, or a title with attached and well-earned competencies has been stripped or disassembled by referring to Scrum. Still — “Scrum is Democracy” might not have the same impact for a cry-out as “Scrum is Communism” in western cultures. I regret to inform you that rule of the people of the state isn’t what Scrum is about.
Scrum is not Democracy
I hope to have shown that Scrum is neither Capitalism, nor Communism, or Democracy. You could have gotten this easier when reading the first page of the current Scrum Guide:
Scrum is a lightweight framework that helps people, teams, and organizations generate value through adaptive solutions for complex problems.
Disclaimer: No Software Architect was harmed during the writing of this article. At least not intentionally. And rest assured: A team not listening to other skilled employees regardless of their title or rank, or constantly overruling them certainly is not what the Scrum Guide intends to build.
