Our sprint review is only a slide presentation. What is missing?
Weak product inspectionUse the review to inspect the actual result and discuss what it means for future work. Slides may provide context, but they should not substitute for meaningful evidence and stakeholder feedback.
What to do now
- Show the usable result
- Discuss relevant outcomes and changes
- Gather concrete stakeholder feedback
- Adapt future priorities from the evidence
When to escalate
Escalate when
The review is concealing unusable or unverified work.
Who decides
The relevant Scrum accountability or delivery owner
Example
Users try the new workflow and reveal a constraint that changes the next priorities.
Mistake to avoid
Presenting planned features as though they were delivered.
Prevent a repeat
Inspect useful outcomes and feedback; apply Scrum-specific rules only when the team is actually using Scrum.
Suggested ApprovedFlow setup
- Tasks
- Documents
- Resources
Represent agreed work and evidence with enabled task features; do not imply native Scrum automation or certified Scrum compliance. See the platform
Related cases
- We have no clear product goal. What should guide the backlog?Directionless backlog ordering
- We carry unfinished work into every sprint. What should we inspect?Persistent delivery overcommitment
- Our team updates status only before review meetings. What should change?Reporting-driven record maintenance
- Our risk estimates are guesses. Can they still be useful?Weak risk evidence