Most of us tackled with SCRUM at least at once. As for me, I do my job about five years using the SCRUM methology. It helpful, it allows us to deliver features and fixes more predictive and transparent, and sometimes, in time :-) you know what I mean. I was a SCRUM master, team leader, ordinal developer, chief... and know what? I still can't understand why we need retrospective.
Last Friday we had one, and our SCRUM master opened a Word document with empty three-column table and asked us the question - "John/Sam/Dan, what you think about last sprint, what was good, what we need to change and what is ugly?". You know that question and I always in trouble what I should to answer. Look, I have a lot of JIRA's, I communicated well with others (BAs, QAs) to get them to solve, and I solved them. Nothing to say - ALL GOOD! And everyone of us said nothing, because - all works well. Right after the meeting, our SCRUM master said that my team-mates "aren't evolved into product". Hey dude, these guys deliver features/fixes every two week in-time and mostly error-free, you can't judge them for the silence on the Retrospective meeting!
If I can't communicate with someone, have hardware problem, or my IDE license has been expired - I don't need to wait until end of the sprint, to tell about it on the retrospective, otherwise I won't do my job well.
As SCRUM methology said - "discuss problems and circumstances with other team-mates..." Cool, but I have time to discuss about on the daily meetings.
So, what do you think about Retrospective? How do we need to cook it well?