I need some clarification about how the changes should be introduced within the process in a Scrum Team and how a Scrum Master should approach it.
By changes in the process I mean for example: changing the length of a sprint, introducing some practices such as limitting Work In Progress, pair-programming etc.
Scrum Master manages the process. Mike Cohn's webpage states:
ScrumMaster has no authority over Scrum team members, the ScrumMaster does have authority over the process.” (...) ScrumMaster can say, “I’ve decided we’re going to try two-week sprints for the next month.”
He also compares Scrum Master to a personal trainer:
The trainer cannot make you do an exercise you don’t want to do. Instead, the trainer reminds you of your goals and how you’ve chosen to meet them. To the extent that the trainer does have authority, it has been granted by the client. ScrumMasters are much the same: They have authority, but that authority is granted to them by the team.
On the other hand Scrum Guide says:
Scrum Teams are self-organizing and cross-functional. Self-organizing teams choose how best to accomplish their work, rather than being directed by others outside the team.
During the retrospective, the whole Scrum Team (including SM) decides about improvement in the process they will introduce.
So is it like this that :
1.Scrum Master decides that a change will be applied (becuase he has the authority to do so - authority granted by the team). And the team members follows this change, because they trust SM and have respect to SM role. So SM says: “I’ve decided we do this and that”
2.Scrum Master just proposes the change and then the team makes the decision that they commit to introduce this change? SM says: “What do you think if we try to do this and that?”
And what if they do not want this change - he cannot force them to do so, and he can “only” remind of goals and try to convince to follow a change?