How do you adjust sprint backlogs when new requests arise?

If you receive new requests during the Sprint that are not urgent, then you have a stakeholder management problem. They should know what you're working on and why that is the priority right now (and not their request). If it is urgent, then there may be something to learn (why do we only know now?) or it simply may be something happened and we need to act.

If you and your leadership agree upon and succeed in creating transparency around your business outcomes and the decision matrix used to triage all bugs and feature requests, a common language emerges such that conversations about sprint disruptions become rare. I find that consistently making data-driven decisions and being transparent about them builds trust because it is all about doing what is best for the customer and the business.

WHEN a New Task Arises: Seek reasons, expected outcomes, and priority. IF the Task Aligns with the Sprint and Vision: Assess alignment with the sprint's goal and product direction. IF the Task Can Be Integrated Without Major Disruption: Incorporate the task into the sprint plan. ELSE If the Task Causes Significant Disruption: Check if the team can accommodate it. Negotiate necessary adjustments with stakeholders. IF the Negotiation is Successful: Adjust the sprint plan and allocate resources accordingly. Clearly communicate changes to the team and stakeholders. ELSE: Postpone the task to a future sprint. ELSE: Decline if it deviates from the project's objectives. ELSE: Proceed with the ongoing sprint planning and adhere to set objectives.

As long as the Sprint Goal can still be met, no negotiating is necessary. You shouldn't plan your Sprint to be so full from the start that you can't deal with surprises. You can gradually pull in work or remove it. Changing the Sprint shouldn't be a big deal if it does not impact the Sprint Goal.

There’s always a buffer capacity for defects, support and unplanned absence but that buffer should not be utilised for sudden requirements. Team should not give unrealistic commitments.

"You should also communicate the change to... the Product Owner,... the Scrum Master, and the rest of the team." The Product Owner is the one facilitating this request and the Developers own the Sprint backlog, the only person on the team not required for this change is the Scrum Master (and there is a lot of value in them being involved). All that said, if there are extenuating circumstances where team members are absent from the decision and conversation- then yes, updating them on the decision is extremely valuable.

After reaching a consensus on the trade-off, it's crucial to enact it efficiently. Start by updating the sprint backlog and sprint plan to accommodate the new request. This process might entail breaking the request into manageable tasks, estimating effort and time needed, assigning roles and responsibilities, and refreshing the sprint burndown chart. Communication is key; ensure that all relevant parties, including the product owner, stakeholders, Scrum Master, and the entire team, are informed of these adjustments. This way, everyone stays on the same page, and the sprint remains on track.

Review the sprint adjustment process during the sprint review to gather feedback from the product owner and stakeholders. In the sprint retrospective, discuss with the team the impact of changes on performance, satisfaction, and collaboration, and identify areas for improvement or challenges.

Very apt. This is the best time to leverage the Sprint retrospective, to discuss how the team took in the adjustments, what they liked about it, what they did not like and what they learn about it. How we can also improve on the process and mitigate against any hindrances they might have encountered going forward. Also the best time to buttress the importance of backlog refinement so that hardly happens again.

Remember, sprint planning ends in a reciprocal commitment… The team commits to completing the sprint goal but the product owner also commits to keeping the scope stable throughout the sprint. The only people who can bring new stories into the sprint is the team, no one else. If you find yourself with new work consistently creeping into your sprints, ask yourself why your backlog is unstable. What can you do to stabilize your work intake process? Is a two-week sprint too long for your context?

In addition to a structured approach, maintaining open communication channels within the team is vital. Encouraging regular check-ins and fostering a culture of adaptability can enhance our ability to respond effectively to evolving needs. Embracing change as an opportunity for growth enables us to stay aligned with our objectives while meeting emerging requirements in a flexible and efficient manner.

During the sprint retrospective, discuss how the team handled the inclusion of new requests. Identify any improvements or adjustments needed in the team's processes to better manage such changes in the future.

Adapting sprint backlogs to accommodate new requests may pose challenges, but a structured, collaborative approach makes it feasible. The process involves grasping the request, negotiating trade-offs, revising the plan, and evaluating the workflow to deter unwarranted changes. By following these steps, you can effectively respond to evolving needs, ensuring your ability to provide value to customers and stakeholders remains steadfast.