My company has implemented a new process of having the team be responsible for the Definition of Done inside of the sprint.
In the Sprint Review meeting the PO is shown the work for the first time and they go through each issue in front of the team and then make comments on the issue e.g. "does it work as intended. if not, how? Defect created..."
Reading lots about Scrum this doesn't seem to be the "Scrum" was to do things, in fact a lot of resources explicitly say that having the review meeting as an acceptance meeting is a bad thing and it should be about feedback.
The problem with this is when should the PO be seeing the work? When do we accept/reject a sprint?
We currently don't have the PO testing in a sprint because of a few reasons:
- If a PO is testing during a sprint then the ownership of making sure issues are understood isn't on the team, they could half understand and just implement something and then get an explanation from the PO after they've showed it to them.
- There's also less need for a team to test their own work because they've got the PO there to catch things.
- The PO has a lot of things to do during the sprint e.g. Backlog grooming, meeting clients, if we add in testing during the sprint to this then there may be too much to do.
Again these are all assumptions we have made so any thoughts on these would be extremely helpful.