Re: [scrumdevelopment] Getting the REAL Customer - was Re: More newbie questions...
- View SourceOn Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 11:22:54 AM, Brad Appleton wrote:
> This seems to be a recurring problem. A related problem is when theThe locutions goal donors / gold owners entered the XP community, I think,
> end-users are a completely separate set of people than the folks paying
> for the production of the software (especially when they are from
> entirely different organizations). I think XP (or is this just on the
> Wiki) refers to these sets of people as the "goal donors" and the "gold
> owners". The end-users (the goal donors) are the ones with the most
> knowledge about how the software should work. The bigger question to me
> is which of these two best represents the *priorities*? I've seen more
> cases where it is the the folks providing the funding that need to set
> the priorities (tho I've seen some the other way as well).
through me. I lifted it from the well-known "jiggler", III. He was the
first place I ever heard the phrases.
It would seem to me that setting priorities to favor the users is generally
the "right" thing to do, at lest in terms of delivering actual value, but
that following the priorities of the gold owners might often be the prudent
thing to do.
Fear is the mindkiller. --Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
- View Source
> From: "Christian Knott" <chrisknott@...>Christian:
> With Scrum, we get to show what's been done every 30 days. That means
> that the "alignment smell" gets to be put on view once a month
> instead of, well, never in many other cases.
But in Scrum we also show what is done every day. Remember,
"Daily Build" and "Daily Scrum" are basic Scrum patterns.
A while ago Jeff Sutherland pointed to an article written by
Martin Fowler about continuous integration. All good and dandy.
It is great to have things like Anthill produce automatic builds
and run batches of unit tests. But it is also important for
the Customer to interact with stable versions of the application
and give feedback from hands-on experience on a daily basis.
Also, there are things like Fit and Fitnesse that attempt to
Automate "acceptance testing". Our style is to do this
through "human interaction" -- there are some things that
we feel are best leaving non-automated i.e. where we want humans
In our development we have perhaps hundreds if not thousands
of builds every day, and thousands of check ins and updates,
but we advertise at least one stable build daily for the customers
to play with.
> For the specific problem of fuzzily defined requirements for reports,done.
> I'm with Ron, pretty much. My difference: do something. Anything.
> Guestimate what the report should be, do it quickly, then mark it
Well, "mark it done" might be pushing your luck.
Some customers take it very offensively to "mark things done"
if they are not done. But certainly, getting a report out
for someone to see will start the feedback loops. (Don't forget
to update your daily estimate to completion after some work
and feedback are produced :-)
> The donors/owners will soon start griping, and you can convertTrue.
> their gripes into requirements that go on the product backlog.