Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [agile-usability] Real data

Expand Messages
  • namgyal damdul
    What if CMM level 5 and RUP practices actually worked significantly better than agile ones? Why not use CCMI level 5 & Agile together? Jeff not only found them
    Message 1 of 218 , Jan 30, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      What if CMM level 5 and RUP practices actually worked significantly better than agile ones?

      Why not use CCMI level 5 & Agile together? Jeff not only found them compliment each other well but also the combination gave value additions : http://jeffsutherland.com/scrum/Sutherland-ScrumCMMI6pages.pdf
       
      Namgyal Damdul (CSM, MSc., BSc. (hons.), BCom.)
      Calgary, Canada.
      http://www.namgyaldamdul.com




      From: Larry Constantine <lconstantine@...>
      To: agile-usability@yahoogroups.com
      Cc: cjonesiii@...
      Sent: Fri, 29 January, 2010 3:13:53 PM
      Subject: [agile-usability] Real data

       

      I am one of the signatories of the Software Engineering Theory and Methods (SEMAT.org) initiative started by Ivar Jacobson, Bertrand Meyer, and Richard Soley. In connection with that, Capers Jones has been sharing with me some hard data summaries on a variety of development methods and practices gathered from a very large number of projects undertaken by varied organizations that contribute data on bugs, costs, etc., to his company.

       

      An interesting thing is that agile methods fare better in most measures, including total cost of ownership of final software product, than practices associated with CMM level 3 but are NOT as good as the Rational Unified Process and all three are trumped by CMM level 5. (The best practices, by a huge margin, are something else, subject for a future post.) I don’t want to get into the specific numbers (the data set is proprietary anyway) nor a long debate about research methods or measures. It is just far to easy to quibble over and be distracted by such matters.

       

      I want to raise a very different issue: What would it mean to the agile community IF these findings really were valid and true? What if CMM level 5 and RUP practices actually worked significantly better than agile ones? Would that mean we should switch horses? Or would it mean we should revise agile to incorporate the best parts of other practice traditions? (And maybe shed some baggage at the same time?) Or doe the agile community have the TRUE answers, regardless of the facts?

       

      --Larry Constantine, IDSA, ACM Fellow
        Professor |  University of Madeira | Funchal , Portugal
        Institute Fellow | Madeira Interactive Technologies Institute | www.M-ITI.org



      The INTERNET now has a personality. YOURS! See your Yahoo! Homepage.
    • George Dinwiddie
      Hi, Jon, ... I ve never found creating software to be a one and only time no matter how small the program. There s a lot of similarity between writing one
      Message 218 of 218 , Feb 12, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi, Jon,

        Jon Kern wrote:
        > ok, maybe it is silly to debate the term...
        >
        > George it's a free country, use method anytime you please :-)
        >
        > I personally will only use "method" when I want to describe some way
        > that I achieve something over and over. Often in an abstract sense,
        > often in a step-wise way. Often because the "something" is a desirous
        > end goal, and one that I (or someone else) wants more than one time.
        >
        > I would not describe the /ad hoc/ "how" of the one and only time I will
        > ever do something as a "method" if it is not.

        I've never found creating software to be a "one and only time" no matter
        how small the program. There's a lot of similarity between writing one
        line of code and writing the next.

        And I've observed, that people generally continue to do something
        somewhat in the fashion they've done it before. Thoughtful people will
        consider the result their achieving, and modify their actions to try to
        improve some aspect.

        I've never seen anyone continue to approach the work as if they'd never
        done anything like it before, choosing some completely different way of
        working. And I've never seen anyone carefully follow the recipe in a
        process manual. At best, a process manual gives the worker some ideas.

        It's the process people actually /do/ that has an effect. If you and
        Scott and Glen want to reserve the word "method" for officially blessed
        procedures, go right ahead. It won't change a thing.

        - George

        --
        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        * George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
        Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
        Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.