Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Origins of Scrum
- Process or meta-process?
Part of scrum is the team (aided by the ScrumMaster) "identifying and
removing roadblocks", but roadblocks, other than being an impediment
to progress, are not defined, and HOW to remove roadblocks is not
defined at all. But I would consider "removing roadblocks" to be a
meta-process - a process in which "how to escalate an impediment" is
defined, but the rest of it is not a defined process.
On 7/1/07, Michael Spayd <michael.spayd@...> wrote:
> Pete wrote/suggested to Ken;
> >2) Emphasize that while the steps to design a specific system do not meet
> the criteria of a defined process, ( i.e. you cannot produce a useful
> detailed plan to produce a complex system), you can define repeatable
> processes associated with the various software engineering disciplines,
> including the project management process (a la Scrum).
> Ken wrote back:
> >There is certainly definition in empirical, but it is only enough to create
> one increment to inspect and adapt on (be empirical about). This increment
> is either what a team members produce for a daily scrum, or what a team
> produces for a sprint planning meeting.
> Ken, I didn't see this in your response, and would really like to know
> whether you agree Scrum is more or less a repeatable process per Pete's
> quote above and that you could similiarly define repeatable processes for
> software engineering (perhaps like XP)?
> Thanks in advance,
> Michael K. Spayd
> Cogility Consulting Solutions, LLC
> "Business Mind, Social Heart"
> "Leading Agile Enterprise Transformations"
C. Keith Ray
I n d u s t r i a l L o g i c , I n c .
866-540-8336 (toll free)
- Hi Alan,On 7/5/07, Alan Shalloway <alshall@...> wrote:I have made several posts illustrating these connections.
Ironically, there has been more discussion on my restatement of
_Jeff's_ assertion (as if _I_ had come up with it when I have
already said isn't that important anyway) than there has with
whether my comments about using Lean in the way I do is correct or
incorrect. I am certainly interested in people's opinions if they
think my posts are useful, useless, questionable, unclear, concise,
Thanks for clarifying that, Alan, it was a bit annoying that others seemed not to understand your intent. I can't comment on your use of Lean except to say it makes good sense to me (I am knowledeable, but can't claim to be an expert in Lean). I would like to emphasize another point of yours in the Agile methodology realm where I can claim expertise (or at least old dog status). That is, you first distinguished principles from practices, then said something to the effect that Scrum does not have clearly articulated principles (unlike XP or Crystal, for instance), even if the practices are quite clear.For me, this was a very useful observation. It is a big gap, IMO. Dave Barrett (above) did what I take to be a good first draft at articulating some principles, but these have clearly not been validated by the Scrum community. I believe, as Dave indicated, they the underlying set of Scrum principles are few and simple, but unarticulated nevertheles.Does that make sense to others? or do the rest of you just believe that that would be helpful? Again, the principles in an Agile methodology do not change (though they might slowly evolve), whereas the practices are adapted by a self-organizing team and a competent coach according to experience and circumstance (and using the applications of the relevant principle).
Michael K. Spayd
Cogility Consulting Solutions, LLC
"Business Mind, Social Heart"
"Leading Agile Enterprise Transformations"