Pigs & Chickens

Myth: The Scrum team consists of "Pigs" (committed) and "chickens" (everyone else).
Variations:

• We treat people differently based on whether they are part of the team or not.

Follow-up myths:

• Chickens don't participate in Ceremonies.
• Chickens are not allowed to talk in the Daily.

Category: Development team myths
Danger: Low

The basis of the myth

The "Pig and Chicken" metaphor is often applied when there is a lot of outside interference with the team.
It is used by many agile coaches and trainers to convey the idea that members of the Scrum team should be absolutely committed to the team and those who are not committed might be a disturbing factor.
That is, the "pigs" on the team should only be working on items which do not contribute to the team's goals during the Sprint period, and nobody has the right to distract them. Those who are either distracted or causing distraction are unwelcome ("chickens").
The Scrum values "Focus" and "Commitment" lend credibility to this claim that Scrum team members should be "pig".

Why is it a myth?

Simply put, the metaphor isn't part of the guide.
And, for cultural sensitivity reasons, some people might be offended when they are told they should be "pig", regardless of how adequate the analogy is.

Assumption #1: Autonomy
When a Scrum team is not autonomous, then people who are not part of the team directly affect their success and are unequivocally contributing to the team's success.
Just like a child who can not wake up on time to go to school can not claim autonomy, a team which relies on external help can not claim autonomy.
Many fledgling Scrum teams are not autonomous in the sense of a meaningful Definition of Done. While it is aspirable to get there, during the journey, they better not discriminate against those they rely on.

Assumption #2: Separable goals

The "pig" may feel that their value to the success of the Ham+Egg restaurant depends much more on their contribution than on the chicken. However, the pig must understand that there will be no Ham+Eggs without a chicken, so the goal will not be attained. If business success depends on selling both Ham+Eggs, then the pig alone can commit all they want, they will still not succeed.
It is healthy to remember the contribution of others as essential, especially when the team stands at the verge of having to answer how they can pull the "chicken" capability into the team in order to get a better Definition of Done.

Consequences

Two-Class mentality
The "Pig-Chicken" metaphor creates a mindset where Scrum team members may disdain those not on their team. This can foster an extremely unhealthy, inappropriate elitism.
Even if the team was truly autonomous (even financially), elitism is not within the spirit of agility.
And when the team actually depends, it's especially harmful to look down on those you rely on.


Communication breakdown

The "Pig-Chicken" metaphor may lead developers to believe that "chickens" don't understand their problem or are of little or no help. Essential communication with outsiders may be considered a "waste of time", potentially resulting in huge opportunity losses. Even if the development team is fully autonomous, communication with the environment is part of natural Inspect+Adapt.

Remedies

The benefit of the Pig-Chicken metaphor is that it provides a simple explanation for discriminating who has the right to change team decisions and direction - and who does not.
However, it can quickly get overstretched and turn into a boomerang.

The best way is not to use it prescriptively in training or team building ("Define:Who is pig? Commit!") but only take out this analogy where it really makes sense - in situational coaching.