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

RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld

Expand Messages
  • Lowell Lindstrom
    It is great PR, so, yes, great going. But, boy, did those articles lack substance. I didn t read anything that would compell me to change what I am doing
    Message 1 of 10 , Mar 21, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      It is great PR, so, yes, great going.

      But, boy, did those articles lack substance. I didn't read anything that
      would compell me to change what I am doing today.

      As I read the increasing amount of press on Agile methods, I am increasing
      disallusioned by the quality of the what is being said. How do we get these
      writers to understand what is really going on here? That it is not simply a
      bunch of consultants that have figured out how to sell something new, but
      rather a fundamental shift in the way that software is being written and
      ultimately a shift in how software driven businesses will operate.

      Again, it is a great start, but there so much more substance to report on.
      How do we get that out there?

      Lowell

      ================
      Lowell Lindstrom
      Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
      lindstrom@...
      Office: 847-573-1565 x20 Fax: 847-573-1565
      Cell: 847-732-9330
    • Ken Schwaber
      Right on the head!! Well said!!! I couldn t believe it when the Computerworld editor told me that everyone at Giga said, Well, we already do that, same old
      Message 2 of 10 , Mar 21, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Right on the head!! Well said!!! I couldn't believe it when the
        Computerworld editor told me that everyone at Giga said, "Well, we already
        do that, same old stuff, some interesting ideas, but..." Reminds me of
        Rational and saying that RUP is agile. They are definitely lightening RUP,
        which is always good, but it missed the shift to agile to which you refer. I
        thought I was pretty blunt at the Giga conference in a panel discussion, but
        even with that they missed it.

        I'm working on a new speech which I'll call, "Well, we already that that",
        and see if I can get any more direct. However, I still get most of Scrum
        implementations where the current project has failed; people seem to operate
        better in desperation rather than with foresight.

        Ken

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
        Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:09 AM
        To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
        Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


        It is great PR, so, yes, great going.

        But, boy, did those articles lack substance. I didn't read anything that
        would compell me to change what I am doing today.

        As I read the increasing amount of press on Agile methods, I am increasing
        disallusioned by the quality of the what is being said. How do we get these
        writers to understand what is really going on here? That it is not simply a
        bunch of consultants that have figured out how to sell something new, but
        rather a fundamental shift in the way that software is being written and
        ultimately a shift in how software driven businesses will operate.

        Again, it is a great start, but there so much more substance to report on.
        How do we get that out there?

        Lowell

        ================
        Lowell Lindstrom
        Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
        lindstrom@...
        Office: 847-573-1565 x20 Fax: 847-573-1565
        Cell: 847-732-9330





        To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
        scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • Mike Cohn
        Best would be getting Ken to go on the Oprah show. I make all my technology decisions based on advice from Oprah. Perhaps if we all emailed Oprah with the
        Message 3 of 10 , Mar 21, 2002
        • 0 Attachment

          Best would be getting Ken to go on the Oprah show. I make all my technology decisions based on advice from Oprah. Perhaps if we all emailed Oprah with the request to hear more about agile methods on her show…

           

          More seriously, though: There are always going to be the little pieces of fluff article and I actually think they serve a purpose. The more one reads about Scrum (etc) the more weight it will have in that person’s mind when he reads the article that is capable of convincing him to use Scrum. I worked with one CEO who actually made his company’s technology decision (to use the Forte language, back before Forte was a Java IDE and had its own language, TOOL) based on article he read while on an airplane. When the time is right, the right article will be convincing but largely because the person is receptive to the idea from having already read or heard about the concept numerous times.

           

          Scrum/Agile Methods have had a lot of coverage over the past year—I’ve been amazed on how much coverage there has been in IEEE journals (Computer, Software) and I think there was coverage in CACM as well. What I’d love to see next would be a short article in a non-computer magazine like Business Week or Fortune. Even if the article had only a little substance it gets read by top decision-makers. Agile methods start to really take off when CEOs are going to the Engineering VPs saying, “Why aren’t we doing this agile stuff? I want our products better and faster! Now go wash my car and then start doing this agile stuff!”

           

          -----Original Message-----
          From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
          Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 7:09 AM
          To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
          Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld

           

          It is great PR, so, yes, great going.

          But, boy, did those articles lack substance.  I didn't read anything that
          would compell me to change what I am doing today.

          As I read the increasing amount of press on Agile methods, I am increasing
          disallusioned by the quality of the what is being said.  How do we get these
          writers to understand what is really going on here?  That it is not simply a
          bunch of consultants that have figured out how to sell something new, but
          rather a fundamental shift in the way that software is being written and
          ultimately a shift in how software driven businesses will operate. 

          Again, it is a great start, but there so much more substance to report on.
          How do we get that out there?

          Lowell

          ================
          Lowell Lindstrom
          Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
          lindstrom@...
          Office: 847-573-1565 x20   Fax:  847-573-1565
          Cell: 847-732-9330





          To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
          To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
        • Mike Cohn
          Ken- Why do you think it is that so many people have that reaction ( sounds good, but we already do that ) to Scrum? I ve thought about it a little bit before
          Message 4 of 10 , Mar 21, 2002
          • 0 Attachment

            Ken—

             

            Why do you think it is that so many people have that reaction (“sounds good, but we already do that”) to Scrum?

             

            I’ve thought about it a little bit before and here are a couple of the reasons I think people react that way. I’m curious to hear what you or others think because you are right that this is a very common reaction.

             

             

            a)       People always react that way to something intuitive when it’s heard for the first time. We’ve probably all experienced this before—something so obvious that you didn’t know it is explained to you and then you can’t imagine not having known it.

            b)       With Scrum there are more things to stop doing than there are to do. Hence your book is 150 pages and Jacobsen’s on RUP is 460 pages. When told what Scrum is, people react with “Yeah, I do that AND MORE!!”  The “and more” is what they don’t realize gets them in trouble and away from agile. (I’d say it makes them non-agile, but Cockburn would turn his pet tiger loose on me.)

            c)       They just don’t get it. I’ve had numerous discussions with people as to why Scrum isn’t just a series of one month trips around a spiral or why it isn’t the same as incremental delivery.

             

             

            --Mike

             

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
            Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 8:18 AM
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld

             

            Right on the head!! Well said!!! I couldn't believe it when the
            Computerworld editor told me that everyone at Giga said, "Well, we already
            do that, same old stuff, some interesting ideas, but..." Reminds me of
            Rational and saying that RUP is agile. They are definitely lightening RUP,
            which is always good, but it missed the shift to agile to which you refer. I
            thought I was pretty blunt at the Giga conference in a panel discussion, but
            even with that they missed it.

            I'm working on a new speech which I'll call, "Well, we already that that",
            and see if I can get any more direct. However, I still get most of Scrum
            implementations where the current project has failed; people seem to operate
            better in desperation rather than with foresight.

            Ken

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
            Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:09 AM
            To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
            Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


            It is great PR, so, yes, great going.

            But, boy, did those articles lack substance.  I didn't read anything that
            would compell me to change what I am doing today.

            As I read the increasing amount of press on Agile methods, I am increasing
            disallusioned by the quality of the what is being said.  How do we get these
            writers to understand what is really going on here?  That it is not simply a
            bunch of consultants that have figured out how to sell something new, but
            rather a fundamental shift in the way that software is being written and
            ultimately a shift in how software driven businesses will operate.

            Again, it is a great start, but there so much more substance to report on.
            How do we get that out there?

            Lowell

            ================
            Lowell Lindstrom
            Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
            lindstrom@...
            Office: 847-573-1565 x20   Fax:  847-573-1565
            Cell: 847-732-9330





            To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
            scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





            To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
          • Narsu, Uttam
            Ken, I presume that you mean the attendees at the Giga conference , rather than everyone at Giga ! I certainly do not subscribe to the view that Agile
            Message 5 of 10 , Mar 21, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              Ken, I presume that you mean "the attendees at the Giga conference", rather
              than "everyone at Giga"! I certainly do not subscribe to the view that Agile
              methods are just the same old stuff repackaged, and neither does my
              co-presenter Liz Barnett. In fact, we made that quite clear at the
              presentation we gave the next day (sadly after you had already left the
              conference).

              I think a better point Carol could have emphasized is the tremendous
              interest in Agile methods. At the time of Liz's and my presentation, we were
              running two tracks, one a geek track and one a process/management track. Our
              talk on Agile methods packed the room, and outdrew the geek track, which is
              the inverse of what happened last year.

              In part, the "we do that, same old stuff" is not what I would have focus on.
              That attitude actually creates an easier sell to management, because
              people's minds are already half in agreement. I think the more problematic
              issue is why there is greater resistance in mainstream corporate North
              America (as opposed to the UK) over the value of Agile methods. In part,
              it's due to concern about the maturity of the ideas, but the greater part is
              due to the (still) prevalent view that one process can fit for all roles and
              all projects.

              Once that view is questioned (and I think Alastair Cockburn's work really
              hits home there), then the perception of Agile methods will change.

              P.S. Thanks for helping make the panel (Ken Schwaber, Martin Fowler, Jeff
              Bitner, Dale Churchett) a real highlight of the conference!

              Uttam

              --
              Uttam M. Narsu
              Vice President, Giga Information Group
              139 Main Street, 4th Floor
              Cambridge, MA 02142
              617-577-4730 617-577-4906 (fax)
              unarsu@... <mailto:unarsu@...>


              -----Original Message-----
              From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
              Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:18 AM
              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


              Right on the head!! Well said!!! I couldn't believe it when the
              Computerworld editor told me that everyone at Giga said, "Well, we already
              do that, same old stuff, some interesting ideas, but..." Reminds me of
              Rational and saying that RUP is agile. They are definitely lightening RUP,
              which is always good, but it missed the shift to agile to which you refer. I
              thought I was pretty blunt at the Giga conference in a panel discussion, but
              even with that they missed it.

              I'm working on a new speech which I'll call, "Well, we already that that",
              and see if I can get any more direct. However, I still get most of Scrum
              implementations where the current project has failed; people seem to operate
              better in desperation rather than with foresight.

              Ken

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
              Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:09 AM
              To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
              Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


              It is great PR, so, yes, great going.

              But, boy, did those articles lack substance. I didn't read anything that
              would compell me to change what I am doing today.

              As I read the increasing amount of press on Agile methods, I am increasing
              disallusioned by the quality of the what is being said. How do we get these
              writers to understand what is really going on here? That it is not simply a
              bunch of consultants that have figured out how to sell something new, but
              rather a fundamental shift in the way that software is being written and
              ultimately a shift in how software driven businesses will operate.

              Again, it is a great start, but there so much more substance to report on.
              How do we get that out there?

              Lowell

              ================
              Lowell Lindstrom
              Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
              lindstrom@...
              Office: 847-573-1565 x20 Fax: 847-573-1565
              Cell: 847-732-9330





              To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
              To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
              scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





              To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
              To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
              scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            • Ken Schwaber
              Uttam and Mike, I know, we get so much excitement, but we re definitely at the early adopter stage. Alistair Cockburn did help get an article in the
              Message 6 of 10 , Mar 21, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                Uttam and Mike,
                I know, we get so much excitement, but we're definitely at the "early
                adopter" stage. Alistair Cockburn did help get an article in the Economist
                (pretty mainstream, there) in late September, but that didn't seem to have
                much of an impact. I really like the idea of the CEO asking the CIO to wash
                the car before doing an agile project, especially since he has so much extra
                time. Whew, enough sarcasm.

                I think Mike has some excellent points about why people tend to dismiss
                agile. I think the IT personality also plays into the picture: we want to
                act like we know what we're doing, have it covered, not to worry. This has
                been a pretty important cover story while we scramble to find out what
                really is going on. More resistance probably arises from the number of
                silver bullets that have been announced in our lifetimes; we get jaded.

                I was presenting Scrum to the management of a project that was purported to
                be in trouble; the technical architects understood and were all for it, the
                regular project and program managers were all for pretending that they were
                already doing it. I detected fear, fear of changing from something that they
                knew how to work, to something that was radically different and might be
                uncontrollable. I find that unless you have experienced the "agile epiphany"
                it is really hard to understand.

                Ross Taylor of TransCanada and I jointly wrote an article for Software
                Development Magazine (to be published in June) that describes this epiphany.
                I writing the article, I realized that there are several defining moments
                when the people really get it:

                Agile processes have several defining moments. When these happen, I know
                everything is going well and the expected benefits will result. At these
                moments, tkey participants really "get it." These key participants are the
                business project manager, the IT project manager, and the development
                team(s). These moments include:
                1. The business project manager realizing that it's ok to proceed without
                all of the requirements being defined.
                2. The business project manager seeing a product increment demonstrated at
                the end of each of the several Sprints. They realize that their involvement
                was important and had an immediate, tangible result. They also realize that
                the project will be successful and deliver them something they want and
                need.
                3. A team member realizing that someone will help when problems occur. After
                identifying an impediment or problem during a daily Scrum, either the
                ScrumMaster or a fellow team member provides immediate help to him or her.
                4. The IT project manager sensing teamwork after walking through a
                co-located team area where pair programming is going on. The buzz, energy,
                and focus are palpable.
                5. The business and IT Project Managers realizing they don't have to tell
                the team what to do and ensure that it does it.
                The team when it realizes that no one is going to tell it what to do; the
                team has to figure out what work to do on its own.

                Ken

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Narsu, Uttam [mailto:UNarsu@...]
                Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:47 AM
                To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
                Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


                Ken, I presume that you mean "the attendees at the Giga conference", rather
                than "everyone at Giga"! I certainly do not subscribe to the view that Agile
                methods are just the same old stuff repackaged, and neither does my
                co-presenter Liz Barnett. In fact, we made that quite clear at the
                presentation we gave the next day (sadly after you had already left the
                conference).

                I think a better point Carol could have emphasized is the tremendous
                interest in Agile methods. At the time of Liz's and my presentation, we were
                running two tracks, one a geek track and one a process/management track. Our
                talk on Agile methods packed the room, and outdrew the geek track, which is
                the inverse of what happened last year.

                In part, the "we do that, same old stuff" is not what I would have focus on.
                That attitude actually creates an easier sell to management, because
                people's minds are already half in agreement. I think the more problematic
                issue is why there is greater resistance in mainstream corporate North
                America (as opposed to the UK) over the value of Agile methods. In part,
                it's due to concern about the maturity of the ideas, but the greater part is
                due to the (still) prevalent view that one process can fit for all roles and
                all projects.

                Once that view is questioned (and I think Alastair Cockburn's work really
                hits home there), then the perception of Agile methods will change.

                P.S. Thanks for helping make the panel (Ken Schwaber, Martin Fowler, Jeff
                Bitner, Dale Churchett) a real highlight of the conference!

                Uttam

                --
                Uttam M. Narsu
                Vice President, Giga Information Group
                139 Main Street, 4th Floor
                Cambridge, MA 02142
                617-577-4730 617-577-4906 (fax)
                unarsu@... <mailto:unarsu@...>


                -----Original Message-----
                From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
                Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:18 AM
                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


                Right on the head!! Well said!!! I couldn't believe it when the
                Computerworld editor told me that everyone at Giga said, "Well, we already
                do that, same old stuff, some interesting ideas, but..." Reminds me of
                Rational and saying that RUP is agile. They are definitely lightening RUP,
                which is always good, but it missed the shift to agile to which you refer. I
                thought I was pretty blunt at the Giga conference in a panel discussion, but
                even with that they missed it.

                I'm working on a new speech which I'll call, "Well, we already that that",
                and see if I can get any more direct. However, I still get most of Scrum
                implementations where the current project has failed; people seem to operate
                better in desperation rather than with foresight.

                Ken

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:09 AM
                To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
                Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


                It is great PR, so, yes, great going.

                But, boy, did those articles lack substance. I didn't read anything that
                would compell me to change what I am doing today.

                As I read the increasing amount of press on Agile methods, I am increasing
                disallusioned by the quality of the what is being said. How do we get these
                writers to understand what is really going on here? That it is not simply a
                bunch of consultants that have figured out how to sell something new, but
                rather a fundamental shift in the way that software is being written and
                ultimately a shift in how software driven businesses will operate.

                Again, it is a great start, but there so much more substance to report on.
                How do we get that out there?

                Lowell

                ================
                Lowell Lindstrom
                Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                lindstrom@...
                Office: 847-573-1565 x20 Fax: 847-573-1565
                Cell: 847-732-9330





                To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
              • Mike Cohn
                Ken- I really like that list of epiphanies. You are right that things are starting to go well when these occur. I d probably add two: 1a) you mention the
                Message 7 of 10 , Mar 21, 2002
                • 0 Attachment

                  Ken—

                  I really like that list of epiphanies. You are right that things are starting to go well when these occur. I’d probably add two:

                   

                  1a) you mention the business project manager deciding it’s OK to proceed without complete requirements but I think this also needs to come as an epiphany to programmers. I have had many programmers fight this concept (“I’ll just end up rewriting this” or “I’ll go ask for a lot more detail” or “I’ll build in flexibility to cover both cases”)

                   

                  6) When a team stops seeming like “testers and programmers” and just “developers”. This sometimes happens on agile projects but never seems to on non-agile projects (here comes that tiger again).

                   

                  I’m looking forward to your article.

                   

                  --Mike

                   

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:24 AM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld

                   

                  Uttam and Mike,
                  I know, we get so much excitement, but we're definitely at the "early
                  adopter" stage. Alistair Cockburn did help get an article in the Economist
                  (pretty mainstream, there) in late September, but that didn't seem to have
                  much of an impact. I really like the idea of the CEO asking the CIO to wash
                  the car before doing an agile project, especially since he has so much extra
                  time. Whew, enough sarcasm.

                  I think Mike has some excellent points about why people tend to dismiss
                  agile. I think the IT personality also plays into the picture: we want to
                  act like we know what we're doing, have it covered, not to worry. This has
                  been a pretty important cover story while we scramble to find out what
                  really is going on. More resistance probably arises from the number of
                  silver bullets that have been announced in our lifetimes; we get jaded.

                  I was presenting Scrum to the management of a project that was purported to
                  be in trouble; the technical architects understood and were all for it, the
                  regular project and program managers were all for pretending that they were
                  already doing it. I detected fear, fear of changing from something that they
                  knew how to work, to something that was radically different and might be
                  uncontrollable. I find that unless you have experienced the "agile epiphany"
                  it is really hard to understand.

                  Ross Taylor of TransCanada and I jointly wrote an article for Software
                  Development Magazine (to be published in June) that describes this epiphany.
                  I writing the article, I realized that there are several defining moments
                  when the people really get it:

                  Agile processes have several defining moments. When these happen, I know
                  everything is going well and  the expected benefits will result. At these
                  moments, tkey participants really "get it." These key participants are the
                  business project manager, the IT project manager, and the development
                  team(s). These moments include:
                  1.      The business project manager realizing that it's ok to proceed without
                  all of the requirements being defined.
                  2.      The business project manager seeing a product increment demonstrated at
                  the end of each of the several Sprints. They realize that their involvement
                  was important and had an immediate, tangible result. They also realize that
                  the project will be successful and deliver them something they want and
                  need.
                  3.      A team member realizing that someone will help when problems occur. After
                  identifying an impediment or problem during a daily Scrum, either the
                  ScrumMaster or a fellow team member provides immediate help to him or her.
                  4.      The IT project manager sensing teamwork after walking through a
                  co-located team area where pair programming is going on. The buzz, energy,
                  and focus are palpable.
                  5.      The business and IT Project Managers realizing they don't have to tell
                  the team what to do and ensure that it does it.
                  The team when it realizes that no one is going to tell it what to do; the
                  team has to figure out what work to do on its own.

                  Ken

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Narsu, Uttam [mailto:UNarsu@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:47 AM
                  To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


                  Ken, I presume that you mean "the attendees at the Giga conference", rather
                  than "everyone at Giga"! I certainly do not subscribe to the view that Agile
                  methods are just the same old stuff repackaged, and neither does my
                  co-presenter Liz Barnett. In fact, we made that quite clear at the
                  presentation we gave the next day (sadly after you had already left the
                  conference).

                  I think a better point Carol could have emphasized is the tremendous
                  interest in Agile methods. At the time of Liz's and my presentation, we were
                  running two tracks, one a geek track and one a process/management track. Our
                  talk on Agile methods packed the room, and outdrew the geek track, which is
                  the inverse of what happened last year.

                  In part, the "we do that, same old stuff" is not what I would have focus on.
                  That attitude actually creates an easier sell to management, because
                  people's minds are already half in agreement. I think the more problematic
                  issue is why there is greater resistance in mainstream corporate North
                  America (as opposed to the UK) over the value of Agile methods. In part,
                  it's due to concern about the maturity of the ideas, but the greater part is
                  due to the (still) prevalent view that one process can fit for all roles and
                  all projects.

                  Once that view is questioned (and I think Alastair Cockburn's work really
                  hits home there), then the perception of Agile methods will change.

                  P.S. Thanks for helping make the panel (Ken Schwaber, Martin Fowler, Jeff
                  Bitner, Dale Churchett) a real highlight of the conference!

                  Uttam

                  --
                  Uttam M. Narsu
                  Vice President, Giga Information Group
                  139 Main Street, 4th Floor
                  Cambridge, MA   02142
                  617-577-4730    617-577-4906 (fax)
                  unarsu@... <mailto:unarsu@...>


                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 10:18 AM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


                  Right on the head!! Well said!!! I couldn't believe it when the
                  Computerworld editor told me that everyone at Giga said, "Well, we already
                  do that, same old stuff, some interesting ideas, but..." Reminds me of
                  Rational and saying that RUP is agile. They are definitely lightening RUP,
                  which is always good, but it missed the shift to agile to which you refer. I
                  thought I was pretty blunt at the Giga conference in a panel discussion, but
                  even with that they missed it.

                  I'm working on a new speech which I'll call, "Well, we already that that",
                  and see if I can get any more direct. However, I still get most of Scrum
                  implementations where the current project has failed; people seem to operate
                  better in desperation rather than with foresight.

                  Ken

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                  Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:09 AM
                  To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
                  Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Two articles in ComputerWorld


                  It is great PR, so, yes, great going.

                  But, boy, did those articles lack substance.  I didn't read anything that
                  would compell me to change what I am doing today.

                  As I read the increasing amount of press on Agile methods, I am increasing
                  disallusioned by the quality of the what is being said.  How do we get these
                  writers to understand what is really going on here?  That it is not simply a
                  bunch of consultants that have figured out how to sell something new, but
                  rather a fundamental shift in the way that software is being written and
                  ultimately a shift in how software driven businesses will operate.

                  Again, it is a great start, but there so much more substance to report on.
                  How do we get that out there?

                  Lowell

                  ================
                  Lowell Lindstrom
                  Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                  lindstrom@...
                  Office: 847-573-1565 x20   Fax:  847-573-1565
                  Cell: 847-732-9330





                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                  scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                  scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                  scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...

                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/





                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.