24985RE: [scrumdevelopment] Retrospective questions
- Nov 5, 2007When the scope of the retrospective is one team (5-10 people) a half-day
retrospective for a 30 day sprint is reasonable. The team is looking at
what *they* can do to improve *their* practices and team work.
What you describe below is looking at improvements that cross organizational
boundaries. The basic flow of the retrospective meeting may still be the
same, but it takes a different level of planning and coordination, both
before and after the retrospective.
I'd want to have a plan to make the meeting effective whether it's an hour
or 3 days. To get benefits from retrospectives, the team (or group) needs to
think, learn and decide together and that requires more than answering "What
worked/What to do differently."
We cover some of the difference between team/release/project retrospectives
(plus lots of resources for sprint retrospectives) in Agile Retrospectives:
Making Good Teams Great (Pragmatic Bookshelf, 2006).
Esther Derby Associates, Inc.
**Secrets of Agile Teamwork PUBLIC workshop: December 11-13, 2007 in
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of luau_boy
> Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 7:17 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Retrospective questions
> How can a retrospective be done by the 'team' - if the 'team' consists
> of 100's of people situated globally - who contribute in a material
> way to the retrospective? (given that a team is usually 7-10 people,
> but that programs consists of many teams)
> Isn't the retrospective supposed to be a 'streamlined and structured'
> way to develop process improvement ideas that can be 'vetted' with the
> SCRUM master and the business (who PAYS for the changes being
> contemplated by the 'team')?
> How are such ideas 'baked', prior to selecting only those ideas that
> are the most 'optimal' for the client and the team(s) that must learn
> and adopt the revised process(es)? How are stakeholders/owners allowed
> to collaborate with the 'retrospective' team - to insure that they
> aren't 'out there' - evaluating potential changes that the
> stakeholders would ultimately - never consider supporting?
> When using a high concentration of consultants, isn't it the
> responsibility of the SCRUM master to develop and gain approval on
> just HOW a retrospective will be properly positioned to insure that
> the company can 'harvest' the collective knowledge of all the program
> participants in the most optimal way? Do I understand correctly that
> all this can be done within a (3) hr. window every month? Wouldn't
> this neccessitate a well thought out plan (in advance)for how to run
> these meetings -- what tools are needed -- what
> communication/collaboration model will be used to insure buy-in and
> participation from ALL impacted stakeholders?
> To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-
> Yahoo! Groups Links
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>