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

2306[scrumdevelopment] Re: QA and Agile

Expand Messages
  • PaulOldfield1@compuserve.com
    Dec 4, 2003
      > And on top of that, how does agile/scrum play into a company's ability
      > to be compliant with section 404 and 409 of Sarbanes Oxley? Are
      > public companies changing internal methodologies to something more
      > heavier weight in hopes to appear more risk adverse? What happens
      > when an auditing firm declares a companies agile methodology and
      > inherently their ability to quickly change directions (which is a
      > double edge sword) a business risk that should have controls around?
      > How can the agile community prevent being forced into having more
      > controls and processes that are akin to a heavy weight methodology
      > which we have seen slow us down?

      > Ideally the agile community would educate boards, managements and
      > auditing firms that being agile gives them a strategic leg up on their
      > competition and should be looked upon as a benefit not a risk.

      I suspect there is a pattern among the successful enterprises that
      have heavyweight processes - I don't have enough anecdotal
      evidence to say for sure, but it seems that in many cases
      the developers tell lies and don't follow the process, they do
      whatever is sensible based on their own experience. Somehow
      I suspect collecting hard evidence on this may not be easy.

      There's a paper somewhere from Mark Paulk (try looking on the
      agilealliance.com website?) relating XP to CMM.

      Paul Oldfield
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic