--- In firstname.lastname@example.org,
"Mark Graybill" <Mark@...> wrote:
> A debate has brewed here regarding a statement someone
> made that we are not really doing Scrum because we do
> not have a releasable product at the end of every Sprint.
There are a lot of good comments in this thread already, but I have a
couple thoughts one is more theoretical one is a practical answer to
the original question.
Whenever I hear someone, regardless of who it is, say, "You're not
doing Scrum because...," my initial response is always to evaluate the
understanding of Scrum implicit in the statement. Scrum has extremely
few moving parts. That fact makes it extremely flexible, but likewise
open to many different interpretations and, consequently, many
different ways to approach the use of Scrum in practice. Anyone making
such pronouncements should be cautious. Conversely it is possible to
adhere to the "letter of the law but not the spirit". Ultimately our
goal is to do software better. A slavish devotion to a particular
dogma is counterproductive to that aim (and is in fact what has plague
PMI style project management for decades).
Now in terms of the question asked I would say that the terms are in
adequately stated. What is meant by "releaseable product"? It strikes
me that there are crucial modfiers missing from that term. It should
read, "potentially releaseable product increment." It is an absurd
standard to suggest, if this is what's really meant, to have a
releaseable product at the end of every sprint. The first couple of
sprints Scrum frontloads architecture and infrastructure types of
tasks onto the backlog. Those are unlikely to result in a releaseable
product in all but the simplest systems.
So then is it simple pedantry to distinguish between "releaseable
product" and "potentially releaseable product increment"? I
no. A releaseable product is, by definition, "ready for primetime".
That is to say its ready for end users on will do something useful.
That is an end goal of the software development enterprise but it is
not an intermediate step. Conversely a "potentially releaseable
product increment" is a small piece of the system that does something,
no matter how small that something is, and which has been as
thoroughly vetted as possible with appropriate levels of design,
coding, unit testing, system testing and MAYBE integration testing.
There is no requirement, in my opinion, that it must do something
useful to the target user by itself.
Jimi Fosdick CSP