I’m closing comments, as this is becoming a conversation more than a collection of contributions. I’ve enjoyed both but don’t think the web site will be improved by going further on this page.

Paul – “I find this sentence is laughable. I’ve got news for you. If an organisation doesn’t want to be Agile it won’t be, and no amount of cajoling by outside consultants will change that. All that will happen is that the consultants will get richer, the Management will gain the rouge of being “forward thinking” that they have paid for, and the workers will become ever more disillusioned, cynical and despondent.”

@Paul – “Culture eats strategy for breakfast”. I sort of agree with you. :-) As an aside, there is a wealth of work in the change industry on organisational culture change. I spend a lot of my time working in that area.

However, I don’t see how in any way that connects to the part of my post that you quoted? Certification gets people in the door (either like Kim who wanted to learn but needed a way to get the org to pay) or (and in my experience) a way to gain access to a group of hurt people who want to find a better way in their profession. They may not have heard of Agile yet – but we can use the training to help them take the first few steps and the C persuades both the attendees and the org that what we offer has value. The second, third and fourth steps are outside the training world – This is where I see we need to focus our efforts as a wider community. To genuinely help people who want help. To help business that want help. The coaching and transformation work. The LEADERSHIP work. How many genuine Agile LEADERS are working as LEADERS? Most at the moment seem to be coaching, training and consulting, and I believe the next step in our world is attaining people in the highest positions of business with an in depth understanding of the principles of Agile. Rather than moan about the bit that works.

You probably don’t know, but I have spent my career working with big enterprises to adopt these new ways of working so I see first hand how hard it is, making “big super tankers turn”- but I also see on a day to day basis the huge benefit of a non profit, certification based offering in our community.

So what is laughable?

> For me to withdraw from my connection with Scrum might pleasure you and others who do not care for my opinions, but it would further divide the Agile community. I am not inclined to do that and am a bit tempted to resent the suggestion.

Ron, I clearly said: “You are an asset to the Scrum Trainer community, and I think almost without exception other trainers respect you, and value your contributions, but being a CST does NOT mean you must deliver CSM (and now CSD) training.”

How is that asking you to withdraw your connection with Scrum? And how does it indicate that I would take pleasure in seing you depart? You are reading things that are simply not there in my comments, not in text or sub-text. I’ll say it again, you are an asset to the Scrum Trainer community.

I suggest you can make the choice to offer ScrumMaster Training and Scrum Developer Training and any other Scrum training you wish to offer, and do this as a person certified by the SA to teach Scrum (CST). You don’t have to offer /certified/ training.

For me to withdraw from my connection with Scrum might pleasure you and others who do not care for my opinions, but it would further divide the Agile community. I am not inclined to do that and am a bit tempted to resent the suggestion.

It does trouble me that this choice also increases the revenue I get. I’d prefer the two to be independent, and freely grant the conflict of interest. I also assert — and think it needs no proof — that every CST and SA-REP is operating under exactly the same conflict of interest.

You are an asset to the Scrum Trainer community, and I think almost without exception other trainers respect you, and value your contributions, but being a CST does NOT mean you must deliver CSM (and now CSD) training. The latter is a privilege of the former, but they are not bound. So practice what you preach in this post, and stop offering certificates with your training. Given your strong feelings on the matter it would seem the honorable thing to do.

And perhaps your example will encourage others to follow a similar path.

More importantly, however, the CSM “certification” cannot really be considered serious, since it means that the certificate holder has stayed awake through two days of training.

What, to me, is most concerning, is that the certification “work”, in the sense that people really do take the course, or pay for it, because it awards a certification. If the certification had teeth, this would make sense. Since it does not, I think we have to conclude that at least some people must be being misled.