This question already has an answer here:
Every book/blog or Coach (and more recently, a 3 day workshop I attended) says having the scrum master serve as a solutions lead or architect is a terrible idea. Though I can't get a clear answer as to why this is.
I'm in a mid-sized yet spread-too-thin company with a 3 member team and Agile is currently being forced down our throats.
Is multitasking (not being able to function effectively in any of these three roles) the biggest downside to this? Any anecdotal evidence to share if people have attempted this? Or is there a conflict of interest (Architects and Solutions Leads swim in details, the Scrum Master just wants to make sure things get done)?
I'd like to make a strong case to the higher ups against this but I do not have enough experience (nor would I like to do a proof-by-failure experiment) to sell this to them.
Edit: Note that the other post asked about a Scrum Master being a Functional Manager (Waterfall role). This question actually asks about combining Scrum Master with two developer-centric roles (Architect and Solutions Lead) => Thereby making this question quite different. In my case, we all (entire Agile team) report to a Functional Manager who does our performance reviews, recruits, procures etc. in the traditional Waterfall manner.