Crickey! You are doin my head in, you are. This thread has become a rope, and a long one. ... Send free SMS to your Friends on Mobile from your Yahoo!Message 1 of 39 , Jul 3, 2007View SourceCrickey! You are doin' my head in, you are.
This thread has become a rope, and a long one.
> --- In email@example.com, "David H."Send free SMS to your Friends on Mobile from your Yahoo! Messenger. Download Now! http://messenger.yahoo.com/download.php
> > > > <snip>
> > > > As much as I respect Mary and Tom and
> yourself, Alan, I find
> it a bit
> > > > odd that we keep repeating something akin to
> a comparison
> which is
> > > > based on three words,
> > > > Muda (no value-added), Mura (uneveness) and
> Muri (overburden).
> > >
> > >
> > > In the case of Lean principles, I believe most
> practitioners are
> > > not familiar with how Lean can help them - so I
> am not sure I am
> > > repeating things at all.
> > >
> > I would argue they need not be aware of them.
> Simply because those
> > principles are not necessarily something that is
> exclusive to
> Lean. If
> > you properly apply XP, DSDM, Crystal, FDD, Scrum
> and so on, you
> > touch on all of the areas which are described as
> being part of a
> > process in the three areas of eliminating waste.
> > I am not disputing that it is smart to make people
> aware of the
> > that there are other, interesting approaches, what
> I am trying to
> > is that I find it odd we would tie it down to
> > I would argue that most modern literature on
> learning would
> > that we learn best by doing. So practices which
> > should have a better learning effect.
> > -d
> There are Lean concepts that are in "XP, DSDM,
> Crystal, FDD, Scrum"
> that can be deduced from them but aren't explicitly
> stated in them.
> That's why I talk about them re Lean. It isn't a
> question of do you
> have to tie it to Lean it's a question of is it
> useful to do so. I
> think it is.
> In any event, I do believe Lean has a more
> enterprise, product,
> business focus than these do. Not that they don't
> work at the
> enterprise, product or business level.
> People may be mis-interpreting what I am saying. I
> am not saying
> you need Lean for any of these. You don't. Scrum
> stands well
> enough on its own when you know how to use it. I
> used Scrum for
> years without truly understanding the Lean-Scrum tie
> in. But I have
> been doing some form of agile development for 20+
> years (admittedly
> on and off until I had some exposure to Kent Beck
> and Ken Schwaber).
> But once I saw the tie in I saw that Lean was a
> great way to help
> people transition to Scrum. Lean has a rich history
> so there are
> many things to pull from. That's all I am (or have
> been) saying.
> Alan Shalloway
> CEO, Net Objectives
Hi Alan, On 7/5/07, Alan Shalloway wrote: I have made several posts illustrating these connections. Ironically, there has been moreMessage 39 of 39 , Jul 5, 2007View SourceHi Alan,
On 7/5/07, Alan Shalloway <alshall@...> wrote:I have made several posts illustrating these connections.
Ironically, there has been more discussion on my restatement of
_Jeff's_ assertion (as if _I_ had come up with it when I have
already said isn't that important anyway) than there has with
whether my comments about using Lean in the way I do is correct or
incorrect. I am certainly interested in people's opinions if they
think my posts are useful, useless, questionable, unclear, concise,
Thanks for clarifying that, Alan, it was a bit annoying that others seemed not to understand your intent. I can't comment on your use of Lean except to say it makes good sense to me (I am knowledeable, but can't claim to be an expert in Lean). I would like to emphasize another point of yours in the Agile methodology realm where I can claim expertise (or at least old dog status). That is, you first distinguished principles from practices, then said something to the effect that Scrum does not have clearly articulated principles (unlike XP or Crystal, for instance), even if the practices are quite clear.For me, this was a very useful observation. It is a big gap, IMO. Dave Barrett (above) did what I take to be a good first draft at articulating some principles, but these have clearly not been validated by the Scrum community. I believe, as Dave indicated, they the underlying set of Scrum principles are few and simple, but unarticulated nevertheles.Does that make sense to others? or do the rest of you just believe that that would be helpful? Again, the principles in an Agile methodology do not change (though they might slowly evolve), whereas the practices are adapted by a self-organizing team and a competent coach according to experience and circumstance (and using the applications of the relevant principle).
Michael K. Spayd
Cogility Consulting Solutions, LLC
"Business Mind, Social Heart"
"Leading Agile Enterprise Transformations"