3 votesMarc Trudeau commented
I understand the motivation for this change, but it is so much more powerful when the team discovers and adopts such improvements on their own. Rather than impose things in the Guide, I encourage Scrum Masters to cleverly wield the existing transparency tools of Scrum to get the team to provide the SM an opening (such as in the Retro) to suggest WIP limits, swarming, etc.; or even facilitate the team to think of these options themselves.
27 votesMarc Trudeau commented
I don't support this change. The organizations I've been in tend to get really wrapped around the axle by even "potentially releasable," and I find the frequent need to explain that the phrase doesn't mean that everybody and their brother has reviewed and likes likes the implementation and thinks its perfect. To me, "potentially releasable" means that the feature meets the acceptance criteria and isn't broken, so the company COULD decide to ship it or might decide to add Stories to enhance it. This encourages buttoning up the feature and inspecting it in the Sprint Review, letting all detractors be heard by adding their proposed enhancement Stories to the Backlog. The PO can choose to push some enhancements down the Backlog, allowing unnecessary work to go undone (one of the best benefits of Scrum, IMHO).