However, availability could also be related to archiving, e.g. how long one is able to go back in time to check on something that has happened in one of the previous sprints. Archiving sprint data is an aspect that is needed by companies (Perry, 2008), although barely mentioned in literature. When using a paper-based task board, all the Post-Its are thrown away at the end of each sprint or stored in a box. Either way, historical sprint data are not available. Someone who wants to go back in time in order to research a specific thing is not able to do so when using paper. Taking a photo of the task board does not help, as this photo only shows a particular moment in time, not the whole progress. Also, when making a photo at the end of a sprint, the task board should be empty: in ideal circumstances, all tasks are in the “Done” column – one can thus predict this status without the support of a photo. When using a software-based task board, things are different: one is able to track the status of every available story or task at any moment in time and one is able to read comments that were made on any story or task (Sarkan, Ahman & Bakar, 2011).
Overhead
3.2.9
In this context, by overhead is meant the amount of training needed and usability experienced, which both are connected to each other.
Software can be very complex and software can be made so that it is easy to use, but the simplicity of a paper-based task board cannot be beaten by software. A paper-based task board needs a minimum amount of training; it only requires a few sentences to explain that the status is updated by moving the Post-Its and to explain the purpose of each column. When one wants to do the same with a software- based task board, several steps have to be made before one is actually able to move tasks: the machine has to boot, the user has to login into the system, the software has to be started, the user has to login into the task board software and not until then he is finally able to do the same.
Next to the lower usability, humans have to be trained in order to use software. They have to remember their credentials, they have to know where to click, they have to understand the nature of the software and they need to learn some tricks to improve their usage – these are all aspects the user does not need to know when using a paper-based task board.
Distance
3.2.10
Distance is a key criterion when it comes to making a choice between a paper-based or a software- based task board. As already described, originally Scrum did not propose to use any software tools. However, since a decade, globalization gets more and more important for software engineering teams (Hossain, Bannerman & Ross Jeffery, 2011). As a result, nowadays only 17% of the teams are at one, single location, the remaining 83% are teams that are distributed over at least one location (West & Grant, 2010). Even more important, 22% of these distributed teams have stated that more than 50% of the team members are located in foreign countries. Thus software tools like a task board can help these majorities to perform Scrum in real time. Teams heavily rely on Scrum tools that work over the Internet that are split in such a way. In Section 5.1 will be described that it is possible to use a paper- based task board within distributed teams, but also that the advantages succumb to its disadvantages, so that teams need therefore a tooling strategy (West & Grant, 2010).
Using distributed teams introduces problems at three different levels (Hossain, Bannerman & Ross Jeffery, 2011):
1. Temporal distance 2. Geographical distance 3. Cultural distance
The temporal distance issue comes into play if the sites where the team members are located are far away from each other, e.g. a team that is distributed over Germany, India and Vietnam are working at very different hours due to the time-shift: when the German team starts working, the Indian team is already having lunch for example.
Connected to the former issue, the geographical issue holds true if the teams are at different locations as this makes it very hard to work with each other, especially if there are important meetings to absolve.
The cultural distance issue is explained by the fact that human people coming from different countries have different backgrounds, be it religion, principles or something comparable.
Software-based task boards offer a solution for the geographical distance issue, as they provide the team with a working task board at any location that synchronizes within seconds – a paper-based task board is not able to do so. Yet, using any of the two task board variants cannot solve the temporal distance issue; it is the job of a ScrumMaster to make sure that the team can meet to discuss important things, although their time zones might be different. The cultural distance issue is easier to solve when the team works together at one location. If that is not possible, the team should have met at least once face-to-face (Paasivaara, Durasiewic & Lassenius, 2008).
An advantage of software-based task boards is the fact, that the customer can get an idea regarding the status of the team, even if he is not able to visit the team. However, this also turns out to be a
disadvantage: most of the customers are not experienced in working with Scrum software tools and might misinterpret the data (Perry, 2008). If the team is located at one place, it is free to choose whether it wants to use a software-based task board or a paper-based task board. Of course, also a distributed team is able to do so, but will face many challenges when choosing for a paper-based task board.