I worked at an AINO company. AINO stands for "Agile In Name Only". Senior management introduced Agile in order to correct the poor product quality and the "abysmal" (their word) pace of development.
After a year of Agile development, which showed that development velocity was not only meeting expectations, but exceeding it, quality and pace of development were completely unchanged. So, they investigated.
What they found was that a developer would be tasked with A, B, C, and D for the sprint. In the sprint retrospective, he'd say that hadn't done any of them, because he'd been pulled off to fix a customer issue that the PM said was urgent, then deal with a crisis in the lab, then be told that new tasks G and H were higher priority, etc. The scrum master would then remove the original tasks from the sprint, and insert the customer and lab issues, as well the new tasks G and H. Story points would then be assigned to the completed tasks because "that way we get the points", and more importantly, it showed management that the project was progressing.
After a year of his, 24 sprints later, tasks A-D were still not complete. The team had spent the entire year doing nothing but putting out fires and dealing with crises, but the metrics looked awesome. The manager and team leads were actually proud of all the progress.
Project management and the finance team were... less impressed.
Sadly, what they will actually ask you about is progress on the project you were prevented from working on
I worked at an AINO company. AINO stands for "Agile In Name Only". Senior management introduced Agile in order to correct the poor product quality and the "abysmal" (their word) pace of development.
After a year of Agile development, which showed that development velocity was not only meeting expectations, but exceeding it, quality and pace of development were completely unchanged. So, they investigated.
What they found was that a developer would be tasked with A, B, C, and D for the sprint. In the sprint retrospective, he'd say that hadn't done any of them, because he'd been pulled off to fix a customer issue that the PM said was urgent, then deal with a crisis in the lab, then be told that new tasks G and H were higher priority, etc. The scrum master would then remove the original tasks from the sprint, and insert the customer and lab issues, as well the new tasks G and H. Story points would then be assigned to the completed tasks because "that way we get the points", and more importantly, it showed management that the project was progressing.
After a year of his, 24 sprints later, tasks A-D were still not complete. The team had spent the entire year doing nothing but putting out fires and dealing with crises, but the metrics looked awesome. The manager and team leads were actually proud of all the progress.
Project management and the finance team were... less impressed.