Arguing for Fungible Team Members...
- I've never had to actually make this argument explicitly before, but my
current organization is happy with having developer's specialize (e.g.,
A only knows how to write reports, B knows a lot about the code
generator tool, C only knows how to write jee apps from scratch with
While I'm sure you get some benefit from the division of labor, it (1)
seems to make planning more difficult and the team less productive and
(2) almost all the agile stuff, of any stripe, seems to assume that
your team is pretty fungible (most of the team members can do most of
Any thoughts, particularly something empirical involving an impressive
formula, would be appreciated.
> -----Original Message-----Arlo's paper was actually at Agile2005, although there was a follow up paper
> From: Adrian Howard
> On 5 Feb 2007, at 17:55, George Dinwiddie wrote:
> > The point made to me was that the novice brought out the
> best in the
> > expert, also. Looking through my notes, I think the reference may
> > have been to Arlo Belshee's "Promiscuous Pairing"
> experience report at
> > Agile 2006. I haven't had time to look it up, yet.
> Thank you! I remember reading about this before, but hadn't
> managed to track down the reference again. Been looking for
> it for months!
by someone at Agile2006. There is also a podcast interview with Arlo at