7 Reasons Why the Stakeholder is Absent in Sprint Reviews

7 Reasons Why the Stakeholder is Absent in Sprint Reviews

7 Reasons Why the Stakeholder is Absent in Sprint Reviews

Seven Remedies to Find Them

The sprint review is an integral ceremony in SCRUM as it gives the platform to developers to showcase the product to stakeholders and invite feedback from them. But often we find the seats with shareholder’s name on it empty.

This absence of stakeholder can be consequential to the project as crystal clear communication between the team and stakeholder is paramount to construct a successful product.

Here are seven reasons why your stakeholders are not attending sprint reviews with seven remedies.


REASON: One of the major reason that could be attributed to the absence of stakeholders in sprint reviews is apathetic scheduling. The stakeholders might have other important engagements on the day of the sprint review. Even though they’re physically available in their schedule their mind could be engrossed on another assignment.

REMEDY: Effective communication between team and stakeholders while scheduling. If possible, the schedule of the sprint review should be set at comparatively vacant day instead of a vacant hour.


REASON: Another reason why a stakeholder might skip your sprint review could be because you’re unable to grasp their interest. The team sometimes over-indulge and demo everything during the sprint. The sprint also often times get hijacked by an in-depth discussion which might not interest all the stakeholders.

REMEDY: The onus is on the SCRUM master to facilitate a smooth flow of communication which keeps all the stakeholder engaged. The sprint could be more immersive where stakeholders are asked to participate in the demo for better engagement.


REASON: Sometimes stakeholders doesn’t deem the sprints important. They are not likely attend as they might know the discussion and decisions that are going to be taken at the meeting.

REMEDY: Prior to the meeting, the stakeholder should be informed in-detail of the agendas and contents of the meeting so that they can make a detailed decision about their availability. It would also mean more active participation from stakeholder side as they are fully-informed beforehand.

  1. FLOW

REASON: The flow of the demo can also disinterest the stakeholder. Stray discussion during the review can make the meeting tedious. Sometimes inconsistent pace and rough transitions during the demo can also dissuade the stakeholders from the sprint.

REMEDY: The sprint review facilitator should set and maintain swift pace of the meeting. It can be done with meticulous planning before the meeting which encourages a smooth and effortless conversation between team and stakeholders.


REASON: The main purpose of the sprint review is to welcome feedback from the stakeholders but often times the stakeholder might not get opportunity to contribute to the conversation as the team naively obsess over their own presentation. We suggest you to read which statement best describes the sprint review for better understanding of it.

REMEDY: The team could plan a conversation break after every demo so that the stakeholder could keep up with pace and developments of the product backlogs. The team should also work on the feedbacks in-between the current and next meeting so that the stakeholder feels heard.


REASONS: Sometimes the development in the products are minuscule to notice from the point of view of the stakeholders. Especially in the case when the product is too complicated. So team-running four-week sprint could be counter-productive reduces it value of these meetings.

REMEDY: If the stakeholder confirms as it being the reason. The reviews could be scheduled every other week which might result it better attendance.


REASON: There are times when the stakeholder might be too busy to attend the meeting or doesn’t value the sprint reviews because of its consistency. This can be fatal as it creates a miscommunication and misunderstandings among team and shareholders.

REMEDY: With extreme politeness the stakeholder should be made aware about importance of the reviews. If they don’t have time for it even after knowing its significance, delegation should be advised and encouraged.