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

Re: [XP] Re: iterations vs kanban Value Stream

Expand Messages
  • Rob Park
    I caught this from Corey off Twitter a while back: The value of timeboxes is to learn how to not use timeboxes, just like the value of kanban is to learn how
    Message 1 of 187 , Aug 4, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      I caught this from Corey off Twitter a while back:
      "The value of timeboxes is to learn how to not use timeboxes, just like the
      value of kanban is to learn how to not use kanban."
      Corey Ladas - Twitter - 13 May 2009

      I took the 2nd 1/2 to mean get rid of the handful of Qs and collapse them
      towards 1.
      Although I don't know, perhaps the limit is 0 if your communication is high
      enough?

      --
      Rob
      --
      http://agileintention.blogspot.com
      http://twitter.com/robpark

      On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Jeff Grigg <jeffgrigg@...> wrote:

      > --- "Karl Scotland" <kjscotland@...> wrote:
      > > Yes. And we always go on to talk about how a Kanban System
      > > visualises a value stream, rather than defines it, and how
      > > visualising that value stream helps the team improve it,
      > > and how improving the value stream might reduce the number
      > > of stages and help the team to a more collaborative, multi-
      > > skilled process.
      >
      > That's good, as far as it goes: One can optimize a multi-stage process to
      > make it more efficient. But I see that as a limitation of kanban, not an
      > advantage. And in extreme cases I've seen it as more of a problem than a
      > solution. (Extreme Programming is intentionally an extreme case. ;-)
      >
      > You see, with close customer collaboration, Test-Driven Development, and
      > automated acceptance testing, I can eliminate *ALL* stages: That is, we can
      > get remarkably close to the point where the customer says, "I want X." and
      > then we build and hand it to them. One step -- without queuing anything or
      > handing anything off to anyone else. Everything that needs to happen can
      > happen right there in the same room, done by the people in the room right
      > there with the customer.
      >
      > Why would I want to make that worse by introducing unnecessary queues?
      >
      > I think kanban is a great way to manage queues of work. I just don't want
      > or need queues of work: I see them as waste.
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: extremeprogramming@...
      >
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      > extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      >
      > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.comYahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Ron Jeffries
      Hello, davenicolette. On Monday, August 10, 2009, at 7:52:58 PM, ... Yep! Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com www.xprogramming.com/blog Accroche toi a ton reve.
      Message 187 of 187 , Aug 10, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello, davenicolette. On Monday, August 10, 2009, at 7:52:58 PM,
        you wrote:

        >> Seems to me this is a quite valid thing to do, but that it's still
        >> managing scope.

        > That's fine. I don't want to get into a circular debate about
        > words. The key thing IMO is that we understand how to work with
        > that type of trade-off to the customer's benefit.

        Yep!

        Ron Jeffries
        www.XProgramming.com
        www.xprogramming.com/blog
        Accroche toi a ton reve. --ELO
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.