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

New Agile Vehicles

Expand Messages
  • Joshua Kerievsky
    Hi Folks, I read Ron s blog about Scrum the other day: http://xprogramming.com/articles/scrum-is-ok/ Ron says: Alan would prefer that Scrum include more
    Message 1 of 216 , Nov 10, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Folks,

      I read Ron's blog about Scrum the other day:
      http://xprogramming.com/articles/scrum-is-ok/

      Ron says:

      "Alan would prefer that Scrum include more things that people are likely to
      need. To me, that is like saying that we should redefine the Corvette to
      have dual rear wheels for better hauling. The Corvette is what it is: deal
      with it. Scrum is defined as it is, by thoughtful people who have a certain
      set of assumptions about how things should work. It works pretty well, it
      has a commanding market share, and it means what it means."

      Waterfall also had (or has) a "commanding market share."

      A "commanding market share" is useful for people who have businesses
      invested in that market.

      My interest continues to be on finding better, faster pathways to excellence
      for my company and our clients.

      When I see repeated flaws like I do in the many teams that adopt Scrum, I
      cannot simply say "oh well, it's the leading Agile process, so deal with
      it."

      Scrum is a 20th century approach to Agility.

      It's "inspect and adapt" advice is beautiful, only too many teams don't do
      it, so we encounter way too many teams that have huge technical debt issues.

      It's the equivalent of pressing the pedal on the Corvette and not getting
      any acceleration - a fatal flaw.

      Should we overlook such flaws and just "deal with it"?

      Fuck no!

      Let's instead focus on creating newer, better 21st century Agile vehicles.

      --
      best,
      jk

      --
      Joshua Kerievsky
      Founder, CEO
      Industrial Logic, Inc.
      Web: http://industriallogic.com
      Twitter: @JoshuaKerievsky, @IndustrialLogic

      Amplify Your Agility
      Coaching | Training | Assessment | eLearning


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Steven Gordon
      On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:11 AM, D.André Dhondt ... Alternative interpretation: Domains that consider themselves scientific tend to require formal proof
      Message 216 of 216 , Jan 24, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 4:11 AM, D.André Dhondt
        <d.andre.dhondt@...> wrote:
        > On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 2:08 AM, Amir Kolsky <kolsky@...> wrote:
        >
        >>   And again, one is reminded of Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis…
        >>
        >
        > Meaning that people tend to reject new ideas just because they're new?
        > (Semmelweis suggested surgeons should wash hands with chlorine between
        > patients).

        Alternative interpretation:

        Domains that consider themselves scientific tend to require formal
        proof instead of empirical success before accepting new ideas.

        >
        > --
        > D. André Dhondt
        > mobile: 215-805-0819
        > skype: d.andre.dhondt
        > twitter: adhondt   http://dhondtsayitsagile.blogspot.com/
        >
        > Support low-cost conferences -- http://AgileTour.org/
        > If you're in the area, join Agile Philly http://www.AgilePhilly.com
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > 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
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.