Well thought out response $...$ May I add another spin to your observations?

One of our readings this week doesn$$t really contribute to the response to this discussion question but does discuss the SCRUM approach $($chapter $2)$ to agile management and could be considered an outside discussion regarding teams.

Our author defines SCRUM as$,$A framework within which people can address complex adaptive problems, while productively and creatively delivering products of the highest possible value.$$

Our author continues to present the three pillars of the SCRUM.

Three pillars of Scrum theory are transparency, inspection, and adaptation.

Transparency

Mutual understanding of standards

Common language so that the process can be shared and understood

Understanding of the definition of done.

Inspection

Frequent inspection also allows progress toward the overarching Scrum goal and allows for identification of variances that would keep the result from being accepted.

Inspections too frequently will do the opposite and actually can hinder progress.

Continuous improvement in those practices would need to be the focus.

Adaptation

A result that is not acceptable or that is undesirable, this then points to a problem in the process

If the process is deemed to be not working and affecting the result or increment, the process itself must be adjusted

The process is not being effectively executed, and it$$s necessary for the team to adapt or revisit best practices

If the process isn$$t working, it$$s time to adapt.

Notice the first pillar, Transparency. This is directly applicable to our discussion question.

$$ Mutual understanding of standards

$$ Common language so that the process can be shared and understood

$$ Understanding of the definition of done.

This is where cultural differences and acceptable ethical behavior can be a huge task for the Scrum Master $($team leader$).$ When you $($the Scrum Master$)$ have a virtual worldwide team, how on earth can this transparency be accomplished?