Sprint Review as a Torture Method?

Question

Just an observation, but I've seen some organizations that don't practice Scrum or Agile very well and don't put in the effort needed to improve it but they always want to have the Sprint Review.So then I asked myself "why?" I think the answer is obvious, it's a form of micromanagement they use to keep developers feeling stress and pressure to perform.This basically boils down to satiating developers who want Agile by pretending to do it while continuing to practice Waterfall.Have others seen the same?

mindcrime · Accepted Answer

I don't think it's that complicated. IME, it's more of this:
1. Holding a Sprint Review is easy
2. Actually acting on the output of the Sprint Review and making concordant changes is difficult, time consuming, potentially expensive, and possibly disruptive.
Add in a little bit of Cargo Culting and blind obedience to a process that was published by Somebody Else, and it's pretty easy to see how an organization could fall into a pattern out having shallow, useless Sprint Review sessions that are done simply for the sake of doing them, but yield no real change.

wreath · Answer

I actually like sprint reviews but for the team to review what we've done in the past 2 weeks and celebrate our small achievement and fine tune it. It's also good opportunity to demonstrate what features we built, again, for the team, as a recap. It gives the opportunity to otherwise shy engineers to speak and present in front of people they trust more, as a training to speak to a wider audience.But i've also been part of sprint review where it felt like it was a judgement day.

Khelavaster · Answer

It boils down to satiating managers who want to hear 'agile' but not follow it's whole set of principles or practices.