Re: [agile-usability] Re: Remote versus collocated teams.
- On 3 Jun 2007, at 14:37, Jon Kern wrote:
> re: /"that co-located groups are more effective."/Very true. There are certainly circumstances when the productivity of
> admittedly, if i took the same group of top-notch distributed people
> that i use on a project and collocated them, we might be more
> but being effective is a very personal thing... a happy developer at
> home with the dog and kids might be more effective than one who fought
> thru 1 hour of traffic to get to work each day. others would prefer an
> office versus the distractions of being at home.
an individual is going to be better better/worse. It's an interesting
question on how that individual affects the team as a whole.
> but collocation in and of itself means little.I don't think anybody is trying to paint co-location as a cure for
> after all, if collocation was *the* answer, why has software
> been in such an abysmal state of low rates of success during the days
> when collocation was most prevalent?
> So, holding all other variables constant and changing only theYup.
> collocation variable... you are more likely to get improved
> effectiveness. at least for part of the time the team is together.
> i also submit that there are much, much, much bigger factors forYup. Although I'd say some of those factors (e.g. closer customer
> and failure than the collocation aspect.
collaboration, common code ownership, etc.) will pay off more for co-
located teams than they will for distributed ones.
> however, i would pit my distributed, ad hoc teams of kick-assGlad it works for you!
> and architects and style of tackling projects in an agile way against
> any collocated team. we are pretty darn effective at yielding dramatic
> savings versus "standard cubicle dwelling" internal development teams.
> And we leave behind the teams with lots of learning and mentorship
> as well!
> btw: we do "collocate" at strategic times on the project.
> Especially in
> the beginning stages. It is simply much more effective. And I
> travel to the client sites and serve as a bit of glue and bridging for
> the team. But being physically collocated every minute of every day is
> not required.
Just hypothetically - if you all lived in the same area do you think
you'd co-locate? Do you think you would work better if you all did?
- Here here Ron! Remote teamwork may be possible but it certainly
isn't ideal. Close collaboration without co-location is a
compromise, sometimes an essential one, but not one you'd advocate
as part of any methodology.
I sometimes like to think of this in terms of new business
startups. How many people would start a business and think, "I
know, let's base our development teams in multiple locations and
have the business owners of the product we're building in a
different place to the developers." For logistical reasons, sales
and other field-based teams maybe, for product development I think
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Ron Jeffries
> Hello, Owen. On Sunday, June 3, 2007, at 11:01:30 PM, you wrote:
> > I realise that many people aren't in my position such that they
> > want hard facts to decide. Many are going to trust the opinionsof other
> > people they may think have seasoned opinions, because theyhaven't got
> > the time or the interest to decide for themselves. However, ifJohn
> > Kern's business, as a case in point, can demonstrate that the usepossible,
> > communications tools to facilitate a remote team discussion is
> > then shouldn't the Agile community be a little less hard onremote
> > teaming?want
> Owen, even Jon said that together would be better. Why would we
> to recommend something that wasn't the best we know?
> Ron Jeffries
> The fact that we know more today, and are more capable today,
> is good news about today, not bad news about yesterday.