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

39726Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: kanban korrection

Expand Messages
  • Dan Rawsthorne
    Jul 11, 2009
    You can't be doing scrum without Sprints. However, you don't have to do
    batch planning, it can be incremental. The sprint is mainly there as a
    big feedback loop for inspect and adapt of product and process. Adapting
    scrum to include WIP is pretty easy, actually, but it causes new risks
    as well as solves existing problems. I call it the KanBan(ish) variant
    of scrum, and is one of the chapters in a book I'm writing. I'll get it
    posted somewhere, but for now, here is a PDF...

    Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, CST
    Senior Coach, Danube Technologies
    dan@..., 425-269-8628



    Karl Scotland wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > Tobias: I read the article. Good stuff. Honestly, if you changed every
    > occurrence of the word "Kanban" for "Scrum" your article would still
    > read intelligently and accurately. What does Kanban add that is not
    > already in Scrum?
    >
    > Karl: The most noticeable difference is that Kanban Systems directly
    > limit work in progress, as opposed to using a time-box to limit work
    > in progress.
    >
    > Tobias: Scrum remember is not a defined process. It is simply a
    > framework that allows teams to create a process for themselves that
    > suits their context/people/product/business environment and so on. The
    > mistake people often make with Scrum is to think they have to do it a
    > certain way, according to a book -- or more often a tool. That is a
    > mistake, and one that causes people to say "Scrum doesn't work".
    >
    > Karl: Yep. Replace Scrum with Kanban and that still applies :)
    >
    > Tobais: As far as I can make out, "Kanban" as a new software
    > process/methodology/whatever was invented because someone's (limited)
    > idea of what Scrum is didn't work for them. Finding ways to be
    > creative within the Scrum framework is to be applauded, but believing
    > one is doing something radically new and giving it a new name just
    > seems like unnecessary overhead.
    >
    > Karl: Wrong - unless you are suggesting you can still be doing Scrum
    > without Sprints (i.e. time-boxes)? It sounds to me like you are saying
    > "If your process works then we can call it Scrum, and if you process
    > doesn't work then we can say its not Scrum".
    >
    >
  • Show all 63 messages in this topic