Scrum is, Scrum is not
Scrum is a framework. You can use it to manage lots of things, including complex product development. Scrum is defined in the Scrum Guide and consists of roles, events, and artifacts, and a set of rules that bind them together. It is based in empirical process control and bottom-up thinking.
The latest Scrum Guide was just released by me and Jeff, and is posted on Scrum.org. Some things like release planning, sprint tasks, and burndowns were removed from the formal definition of Scrum. They were removed because they weren’t Scrum. Are they useful? Absolutely! But it became apparent that these weren’t Scrum when people proposed other techniques that were equally effective. We certainly don’t want people to feel restricted or constrained from other effective practices if they use Scrum.
You should feel free to continue to use burndowns (Sprint and Release), to do release planning, and to commit. Do anything that works within the Scrum framework and aids you in doing your work, building complex products.
You even feel free to do things that aren’t coherent and consistent with Scrum. You are free to do continuous flow, but if you choose to do it without increments and iterative time-boxes, you aren’t doing Scrum. You are free to assign tasks to resources based on their capacity, but then you aren’t doing the self-organization required of Scrum.
We give you permission to do anything that you want. The Scrum Guide will help you understand whether that is Scrum or not. The results will help you decide whether that is a wise practice or technique, or not.

Hello Ken,
I have translated into French your great post :
http://agilarium.wikispaces.com/C%27est+du+Scrum+ou+%C3%A7a+n%27en+est+pas
Regards,
Fabrice
Excellent! Thanks for making it so ‘simple’ to understand. It’s the application that is hard!
There is a lot to said for keeping things simple. Scrum is easy to pick up and use on a daily basis. That’s good but it brings with it a downside.
Scrum is also easy to modify, tamper with, and append to. People often try to “improve” Scrum, fail, and claim that Scrum doesn’t work. Yet, using only the basics of Scrum also doesn’t work in many situations.
Would it be a bad outcome to have variations or flavors of Scrum? Perhaps “Basic Scrum”, “Advanced Scrum” and “Enterprise Scrum”? One size of software development does not fit all. We have to do better.
This brings in a whole breath of fresh air with the flexibility of scrum and how it adapts. Well played.
[...] von ScrumBut Ken Schwaber hat in seinem Blog die bisher harte Einschränkung von ScrumBut relativiert. D.h. durch die Entfernung einiger Scrum-Praktiken wie Burndown Charts und Releaseplanung aus dem [...]
[...] Scrum is, Scrum is not Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. Leave a comment [...]
[...] http://kenschwaber.wordpress.com/2011/08/11/scrum-is-scrum-is-not-2/ Share this:Like this:LikeSei der Erste, dem dieser post gefällt. [...]
This was long due. Thanks.
I like to say Scrum is hard becasue
Scrum = Simplicity + discipline
Just a thought
Hi Ken,
But what’s the point of having a framework if you give people all this flexibility. This in my opinion, will slowly reduce Scrum to just a set of best practices that can be changed or adapted partially…
@Ken: Lovely post! Scrum Guide has been a tremendous value add to the entire Agile Community & your posts are amazingly simple, yet so deep in significance. I am from India & with the growing interest on Scrum, I wonder weather you have any plans to visit this part of the Globe in near future. It will be an honor & pleasure to meet you.
cool article thanks dostlar
Thanks Cool Article Admin yeahhh
Nice, simple and effective. Thanks