RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Scrum and Process Improvement
My comment is by no means a hit on Phil's work.
From what I have heard about Phil's work, he has "independently
rediscovered" many of these things. (Unfortunately there is
little reference to previous art in many software development
Nonaka and Takeuchi, the same guys that wrote the seminal
[NonakaTakeuchi] Takeuchi H. and Nonaka I., The New New
Product Development Game, Harvard Business Review (January 1986),
pp. 137-146, 1986.
are also the authors of some of the seminal work on Knowledge
Management (the management trend that lasted almost 5 years and
that led to little because most of it was misapplied):
[NonakaTakeuchi95] Nonaka I., Takeuchi H.,The Knowledge Creating
Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation,
Oxford University Press, Oxford 1995.
This work was the continuation and extrapolation of the concepts
exposed in the HBR article to business processes other
than New Product Development.
Very literally, Scrum is, and has always been, a process for
knowledge creation. (Check out the either the original references
above, or what Ken and I wrote on Ch 6 about the connections of
Scrum with "Knowledge Creation" and/or "New Product Development".)
From: Steven Gordon [mailto:sagordon@...]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 12:52 PM
Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Scrum and Process Improvement
Then, I must have read that when I read your book several months ago. It
must have planted a seed that was fertilized when I read Phil Armour's
articles about knowledge and software.
From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 12:42 AM
Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Scrum and Process Improvement
The "knowledge arguement" is, btw, also the Scrum arguement.
Ken and I talk about it in the Scrum book. See Ch 6 section
--- In email@example.com, Steven Gordon
> Another approach to get to the same conclusion is Phil Armor's
> which I oversimplify a little as follows:explore that
> - software is executable knowledge.
> - therefore, a major part of the software development process is the
> development of the applicable knowledge.
> - to be successful, we must have the flexibility and freedom to
> domain (with the customer, or at least guided by customerpriorities and
> feedback) in order to acquire/develop the applicable knowledge.where this
> - if the domain is non-trivial, we cannot predict ahead of time
> exploration will take us and how long it will take, but we can timebox it
> to keep it under control.development and
> I prefer this argument because the analogy between software
> physical sciences is imperfect and may lead to false conclusionswhere the
> analogy breaks down (I do not believe software development is ascience or
> even a field of engineering, as science and engineering areclassically
> defined, but that is a different subject).any
> Steven Gordon
> http://sf.asu.edu/ <http://sf.asu.edu/>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
> Sent: Wed 8/27/2003 5:57 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and Process Improvement
> I'm working on an article about why people have so much trouble
> understanding Scrum, even me. I put it up on my website and welcome
> comments. www.controlchaos.com/scrumhard.pdf.< http://rd.yahoo.com/M=244522.3707890.4968055.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=17
> Ken Schwber
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> o?YH=3707890&yhad=1595054> Click Here!M=244522.3707890.4968055.1261774/D=egroupmai
> < http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l? <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?>
> To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@e...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> [Non98] Nonaka, I. and N. Konno (1998). "The ConceptMore on Ba here:
> Of "Ba": Building A Foundation For Knowledge
> Creation." California Management Review 40 (3): 40 -