How would you as a coach get a team (distributed either around the USA or the world) to update the team s burn down chart?Message 1 of 55 , Apr 3, 2011View SourceHow would you as a coach get a team (distributed either around the USA or the world) to update the team's burn down chart?On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
Hello, Andrew. On Sunday, April 3, 2011, at 12:16:55 PM, you
wrote:I am telling you that in my opinion, drawing charts by hand is
> Are you telling me that you have been essentially on projects
> where the burndown chart is mainly drawn by hand? How big is the
> team size and are all the team members always in the same room?
> Are we talking about software development in start ups or in
> corporate environments?
better for the team than using a tool.
Testing quality into a program is like spinning straw into gold.
-- George Cameron.
Great post Matheus - couldn t agree more! Just one thing to add, if you do have non-located teams, capture the wall in some electronic form, send it to otherMessage 55 of 55 , May 17, 2011View SourceGreat post Matheus - couldn't agree more!
Just one thing to add, if you do have 'non-located' teams, capture the wall in some electronic form, send it to other teams and get them to 'copy' it onto their wall. Someone may moan about the extra work to start with but everybody should soon see the advantages.
--- In email@example.com, Matheus Gorino <lists@...> wrote:
> I've worked with Greenhopper for a while and I see 2 problems using it.
> 1. Every time they wanted to see it, they had to alt+tab to their browser,
> then either ctrl+tab to the previously opened chart board tab, or click on
> the chart board link, wait some seconds while it is generated, and see it.
> As it takes some boring steps, they didn't see it much, and I, the SM, have
> found myself for several times needing to check if they were looking at the
> graph and knew where they were.
> After introducing a physical chart, they didn't need to alt+tab anymore,
> they just needed to raise their head and look at the wall, and they started
> doing that several times a day. So it's not only having them to hand-draw
> the chart (which I believe made them more "owners" of this artifact), but it
> also increases visibility, what's is most important in my point of view.
> For sure, this will not work if you don't have a co-located team, but if you
> have a distributed team, the electronic vs. physical chart would be one of
> the smaller problems I'd be concerned about, as you would be losing a lot of
> other advantages of working co-located :)
> Also, I don't think that your Client should be looking at the Sprint
> burdown, as it is a Team's only artifact and it may be miss-interpreted by
> people outside the team, putting unwanted/unnecessary pressure on them.
> 2. Worse than the electronic Chart board is the electronic Kanban board.
> When using the Greenhopper Task board I found the team several times without
> the vision of the whole and not doing one-piece-flow. As sometimes we have a
> lot of Stories and Tasks, you need to use the browser's scrollbars to see
> which Stories are opened, how many Tasks are in progress, and can not easily
> balance between the To-do and Done column.
> Switching to a physical Kanban board made everything more clear. Sometimes,
> in the middle of the Sprint, looking at the To-Do column and seeing a lot of
> items, and then looking at the Done and seeing few items, says much more
> than the Burndown.
> I no longer need to warn the team about the WIP and one-piece-flow, they now
> perceive it much more easily. Now, when a developer gets up and go to the
> board to pick a new task, everybody sees it and they are now asking each
> other to help them close their current open tasks, instead of picking up a
> new task on the wall.