Clarification on PO Responsibilities vs. Technical Documentation Ownership (SAP-related Bugs)
I would like to believe that I’m not mistaken in this situation. I’m a Product Owner (PO), but we also have Technical Architects in the company who are part of the development team. In addition, we have people from SAP who sometimes get involved during the implementation process or only when bug fixes related to SAP are needed (only when there are bugs; they are not part of the main Scrum Team and don’t work with Scrum or Agile methodologies).
There have been cases where one of the Architects mentioned me in a Jira ticket, commenting that documentation about how the SAP team resolved a bug should be included in the Jira ticket. This is because the SAP team usually doesn’t document their solutions directly in the tickets.
I replied to the Architect that, although I can include some references in the ticket, the SAP team is the main point of contact who should be addressed with the request to provide proper documentation.
I’m not sure what’s right or wrong here—I don’t have much experience as a PO, and I don’t know if we are breaking any Scrum principles. But I feel that some people think everything should be addressed to the PO and expect the PO to resolve everything. The truth is that I can’t be behind everyone, constantly asking them to please document things. I’m also not sure if this is something the Scrum Master should handle instead.
Additionally, I think the developers themselves, in their technical role, should directly ask the SAP team for documentation, since in the end it’s their work that is impacted. If more SAP-related bugs occur, having that documentation would help them in their analysis.
I’m sure there are different opinions on this, and I’d appreciate hearing from experienced POs or Agile Coaches on how this kind of situation should ideally be handled.
It sounds as though SAP documentation or input is needed before certain work will be Ready for Sprint Planning. Without it, the Developers are unable to commit to Done.
Is this information being actively sought during Product Backlog refinement?
It’s a good idea to discuss this with the Scrum Master, and possibly involve the architect. At the very least, clarify with the architect what the strategic intent is—e.g., is there a desire to build internal SAP expertise over time?
Scrum does not prescribe how a PO should engage with external technical suppliers. As Product Owner, you ensure the Product Backlog clearly reflects the work the team needs to do, and include any dependencies on the SAP team. Then the technical resolutions you mentioned, generally fall within the team’s domain. You are not violating any Scrum rules, this is more a practical team-level matter.
A joint session or workshop could help clarify expectations and responsibilities. This could also be raised in a Retrospective, so the team can decide together how to best handle communication, handoffs, and knowledge sharing.
In short: no, you are not breaking any Scrum rules in my opinion. This sounds more like a team issue requiring input from the technical side, and use the Scrum Master to help guide the discussion.