RE: [leanagilescrum] Re: Safeguards
- Paul,The safeguards I was thinking of included:From Scrum::* The ScrumMaster is a safeguard against ineffective managers* The Product Owner role is a safeguard against ineffective group decision making processes and insufficient allocation of team resource towards requirements and customer knowledge* Sprint Retrospectives are a safeguard against inadequate ongoing reflection and root cause analysis* The specific time box limits for various sprint events are safeguards against spending an inappropriately long time on any one of them* The fixed nature of the Scrum (i.e. Ken Scwhaber's position that there will be no Scrum 2.0) is a safeguard against inappropriate customizationFrom Agile in general:* The institutionalized bias of the agile manifesto is a safeguard against excesses or inappropriate application of the "things on the right" (vs. relying on context and an understanding of the higher level goals to decide what approach to use in any particular situation)* Self-contained iterations are a safeguard against excessive cycle time and WIP (vs. alternatives such as kanban)* Preferring generalists to specialists is a safeguard against the wastes of handoff and excessive WIP (vs. retaining specialists whenever the labor market or performance difference calls for it)Pete
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Paul Oldfield
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 11:07 AM
Subject: [leanagilescrum] Re: Safeguards
(responding to Peter)
> For what it's worth, I wasn't thinking of "feedback" when I was
> speaking of safeguards, but I agree with all of your points!
Okay, help me, my mind's gone blank... can you give an example
of the type of safeguard you were talking about?
- Hello, Alan. On Friday, September 5, 2008, at 6:44:03 PM, you
> I don't keep hitting my head against the wall, but I have foundYes, I think it is very valuable to understand what is up with
> that repeatedly asking myself - what are they thinking that has
> them not see this is a better way (when I am trying to convince
> someone of something I know is a better way) has often led to true
> breakthroughs for individuals. This is, of course, a matter of
> degree. I suspect if we sat down and talked about this we'd find
> we are virtually in agreement. I say this because most any time
> we've disagreed on the list and then did sit down and talked we
> did agree (except about marketing / certification! ) . :)
people. A truth that comes out of the retrospective community is
that people are always doing their best -- in the sense that they
are always optimizing their results as best they can. When they're
not doing what we wish they would, odds are that their reward
structure isn't what we think it is.
In the end, the extent to which people prosper is up to them. If
doing certain practices would help them, and they choose to do
something else, so be it. I'll keep trying to express my ideas, but
I'm not going to buy in to their failure, any more than I can buy in
to their success.
As for marketing and certification, we might even agree about that.
There are many things I won't currently do for money, but I'm pretty
sure you and I see the world working in very similar ways. :)
Questioner: How do I sell my executive team on doing this stuff?
Jim Highsmith: Don't. Just do it. They don't know what you're doing anyway.