Re: [agile-usability] Re: Communication channels in agile
- Actually, I do think that pure outsourcing like you are talking about here is less difficult than a split team. Again, with anyone remote, time zones become a large factor. If you can have a remote customer who is willing to be constantly available during the times you are actually working, this is obviously better because it eliminates the bulk of the communication cycle time. There are still problems with the richness of the communication channels. All joking aside, things like body language just don't communicate as well over video as they do when two people are standing/sitting side-by-side. That body language is actually a very large component of our communications and helps particularly in making sure that there is real alignment in two people's perceptions. Sometimes we can use the same language as someone else, but mean completely different things. This situation is easier to avoid if you can actually see people's body language.Mishkin.
acyment <acyment@...> wrote:That's really good advice...and what would you call remotely
developing a product for an overseas customer? Almost all the team is
in Argentina, except for the actual customer...would that be a
mixture? Wouldn't communication channels be minimized in that case?
What if this remote customer were available all the time, but through
videoconference? Wouldn't that be sort of an on-site customer?
--- In agile-usability@ yahoogroups. com, Mishkin Berteig <mishkin@... >
> There is one way to develop software for a global market that does
not require you to work with a distributed team: web-based products.
> You can use agile methods (like Google, Ebay, Yahoo!) to deliver a
stream of constantly improving software to the web. In this case, you
need to have a person who understands your users and can act as an
on-site customer representative.
> You don't need any special tools because your development team
could all be together (in Argentina, for example).
> This is, of course, a riskier venture than running an outsourcing
> Good luck!
> acyment <acyment@... > wrote:
> > Thanks, Ron.
> > So, if we could reproduce the good effects of the War Room
> > in a distributed situation, this would give us something to
> > aim for... in absence of any chance of co-locating.
> > Paul Oldfield
> This is precisely where my original question pointed at. What prop,
> what technology shall we need, which maybe doesn't exist yet, in order
> to have a "distributed War Room" (which would not be as good as the
> local War Room, but could maybe allow us to get rid of all that
> accidental communication problems and take us nearer from the
> essential ones)? Lots of webcams and LCDs on the wall? True, no touch
> and no smell. But we IT people are not precisely dogs as far as
> interpersonal behavior goes I guess...
> I haven't yet explained my reasons behind this question. I'm from
> Argentina (i.e. third world - cheap programmers) . I love agile. And
> I'd love to have my own company that develops software for the world.
> When I told Kert Peterson about this, he asked the obvious: why don't
> you just develop software for Argentinean companies? I could, but the
> market is not only small and limited (practically everything is CRUDs
> down here), but I also love having to work with people round the globe.
> Thanks for all the great feedback so far,
> Mishkin Berteig
> http://www.agileadv ice.com/
> "Truthfulness is the foundation of all human virtues" - Baha'u'llah
> ------------ --------- --------- ---
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.
"Truthfulness is the foundation of all human virtues" - Baha'u'llah
All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.