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

Re: Post-Agile-Scrum

Expand Messages
  • Alan Shalloway
    ... with ... to ... you ... Dmitry: I just noticed this. Thanks for asking this great question. Questions to the webinar should be posted on the Lean Agile
    Message 1 of 16 , Feb 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Dmitry Beransky"
      <yahoo@...> wrote:
      >
      > Questions to Alan Shalloway.
      >
      > Alan, my team and I listened to you webinar today and we came out
      with
      > two questions:
      >
      > 1) You said that QA's job should be not as much fixing bugs as
      > preventing them. Our QA person wanted to know what specifically she
      > can do (designing acceptance tests and setting up regression tests)
      to
      > prevent bugs.
      >
      > 2) You talked about managers still being involved in Scrum. Could
      you
      > give a few specific examples of such involvement?
      >
      >
      > Thanks
      > Dmitry
      >
      Dmitry:
      I just noticed this.

      Thanks for asking this great question. Questions to the webinar
      should be posted on the Lean Agile Scrum user group I moderate
      (http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/leanagilescrum). The answer to
      this question will go beyond Scrum and this user group is meant to be
      focused on Scrum. In any event, other questions / dialogs about the
      webinar have already been taking place there and you might find them
      interesting as well.

      Alan Shalloway
      CEO, Net Objectives
    • Tobias Mayer
      ... Beyond Scrum... I m not sure why that phrase makes me uneasy, but it does. Perhaps it has something to do with branding or over-complicating. What
      Message 2 of 16 , Feb 1, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        > The answer to this question will go beyond Scrum...

        Beyond Scrum...  I'm not sure why that phrase makes me uneasy, but it does.  Perhaps it has something to do with branding or over-complicating.  What exactly is leanagilescrum?  Is it like Scrum v2.0, or Scrum for grown-ups or something?  Seriously, is this a statement that Scrum is deficient?

        Tobias



        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Shalloway" <alshall@...> wrote:
        >
        > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Dmitry Beransky"
        > yahoo@ wrote:
        > >
        > > Questions to Alan Shalloway.
        > >
        > > Alan, my team and I listened to you webinar today and we came out with two questions:
        > >
        > > 1) You said that QA's job should be not as much fixing bugs aspreventing them. Our QA person wanted to know what specifically she can do (designing acceptance tests and setting up regression tests) to prevent bugs.
        > >
        > > 2) You talked about managers still being involved in Scrum. Could you give a few specific examples of such involvement?
        > >
        > > Thanks
        > > Dmitry
        > >
        > Dmitry:
        > I just noticed this.
        >
        > Thanks for asking this great question. Questions to the webinar
        > should be posted on the Lean Agile Scrum user group I moderate
        > (http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/leanagilescrum). The answer to
        > this question will go beyond Scrum and this user group is meant to be
        > focused on Scrum. In any event, other questions / dialogs about the
        > webinar have already been taking place there and you might find them
        > interesting as well.
        >
        > Alan Shalloway
        > CEO, Net Objectives
        >
      • Mike Cohn
        Tobias-- You left off the (tm). It should always be written as leanagilescrum (tm). Mike
        Message 3 of 16 , Feb 2, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Tobias--
          You left off the (tm). It should always be written as leanagilescrum (tm).

          Mike


          On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:03 AM, Tobias Mayer wrote:


          > The answer to this question will go beyond Scrum...

          Beyond Scrum...  I'm not sure why that phrase makes me uneasy, but it does.  Perhaps it has something to do with branding or over-complicating.  What exactly is leanagilescrum?  Is it like Scrum v2.0, or Scrum for grown-ups or something?  Seriously, is this a statement that Scrum is deficient?

          Tobias



          --- In scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com, "Alan Shalloway" <alshall@...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com, "Dmitry Beransky" 
          > yahoo@ wrote:
          > >
          > > Questions to Alan Shalloway.
          > > 
          > > Alan, my team and I listened to you webinar today and we came out with two questions:
          > > 
          > > 1) You said that QA's job should be not as much fixing bugs aspreventing them. Our QA person wanted to know what specifically she can do (designing acceptance tests and setting up regression tests) to prevent bugs.
          > > 
          > > 2) You talked about managers still being involved in Scrum. Could you give a few specific examples of such involvement?
          > > 
          > > Thanks
          > > Dmitry
          > >
          > Dmitry:
          > I just noticed this. 
          > 
          > Thanks for asking this great question. Questions to the webinar 
          > should be posted on the Lean Agile Scrum user group I moderate 
          > (http://tech. groups.yahoo. com/group/ leanagilescrum) . The answer to 
          > this question will go beyond Scrum and this user group is meant to be 
          > focused on Scrum. In any event, other questions / dialogs about the 
          > webinar have already been taking place there and you might find them 
          > interesting as well.
          > 
          > Alan Shalloway
          > CEO, Net Objectives
          >


        • Michael James
          ... I m going to beat you all to the punch by forming a leanagilescrumrup group. --mj (king of the Star-Belly Sneetches)
          Message 4 of 16 , Feb 3, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Mike Cohn <mike@...> wrote:
            >
            > Tobias--
            > You left off the (tm). It should always be written as leanagilescrum
            > (tm).
            >
            > Mike

            I'm going to beat you all to the punch by forming a "leanagilescrumrup"
            group.

            --mj (king of the Star-Belly Sneetches)
          • Ilja Preuss
            ... I think it should be something more along the lines of leanagilescrumcrystalfdd . Or perhaps leanagilescrumpairprogrammingtdd . Adding RUP simply adds
            Message 5 of 16 , Feb 3, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              Michael James wrote:
              > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Mike Cohn <mike@...> wrote:
              >> Tobias--
              >> You left off the (tm). It should always be written as leanagilescrum
              >> (tm).
              >>
              >> Mike
              >
              > I'm going to beat you all to the punch by forming a "leanagilescrumrup"
              > group.


              I think it should be something more along the lines of
              "leanagilescrumcrystalfdd". Or perhaps
              "leanagilescrumpairprogrammingtdd". Adding RUP simply adds too much of a
              different flavor to the mix - or can anyone tell how Scrum is *widening*
              the topic from Agile?

              Cheers, Ilja
            • woynam
              You left off the tm, leanagilescrumruptm.
              Message 6 of 16 , Feb 4, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                You left off the tm,

                leanagilescrumruptm.


                --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Michael James" <michael@...>
                wrote:
                >
                > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Mike Cohn <mike@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Tobias--
                > > You left off the (tm). It should always be written as leanagilescrum
                > > (tm).
                > >
                > > Mike
                >
                > I'm going to beat you all to the punch by forming a "leanagilescrumrup"
                > group.
                >
                > --mj (king of the Star-Belly Sneetches)
                >
              • Alan Shalloway
                ... it ... Scrum ... Tobias: As I mentioned to Dmitry, I am happy to answer this question on the LeanAgileScrum user group. The answer involves more than what
                Message 7 of 16 , Feb 4, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Tobias Mayer"
                  <tobyanon@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > > The answer to this question will go beyond Scrum...
                  >
                  > Beyond Scrum... I'm not sure why that phrase makes me uneasy, but
                  it
                  > does. Perhaps it has something to do with branding or
                  > over-complicating. What exactly is leanagilescrum? Is it like
                  Scrum
                  > v2.0, or Scrum for grown-ups or something? Seriously, is this a
                  > statement that Scrum is deficient?
                  >
                  > Tobias
                  >
                  Tobias:

                  As I mentioned to Dmitry, I am happy to answer this question on the
                  LeanAgileScrum user group. The answer involves more than what is in
                  Scrum and this user group is about Scrum. I don't want to get banned
                  again.

                  Alan Shalloway
                  CEO, Net Objectives

                  >
                  >
                  > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Shalloway" <alshall@>
                  > wrote:
                  > >
                  > > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Dmitry Beransky"
                  > > yahoo@ wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Questions to Alan Shalloway.
                  > > >
                  > > > Alan, my team and I listened to you webinar today and we came
                  out
                  > with two questions:
                  > > >
                  > > > 1) You said that QA's job should be not as much fixing bugs
                  > aspreventing them. Our QA person wanted to know what specifically
                  she
                  > can do (designing acceptance tests and setting up regression tests)
                  to
                  > prevent bugs.
                  > > >
                  > > > 2) You talked about managers still being involved in Scrum.
                  Could
                  > you give a few specific examples of such involvement?
                  > > >
                  > > > Thanks
                  > > > Dmitry
                  > > >
                  > > Dmitry:
                  > > I just noticed this.
                  > >
                  > > Thanks for asking this great question. Questions to the webinar
                  > > should be posted on the Lean Agile Scrum user group I moderate
                  > > (http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/leanagilescrum). The answer to
                  > > this question will go beyond Scrum and this user group is meant
                  to be
                  > > focused on Scrum. In any event, other questions / dialogs about
                  the
                  > > webinar have already been taking place there and you might find
                  them
                  > > interesting as well.
                  > >
                  > > Alan Shalloway
                  > > CEO, Net Objectives
                  > >
                  >
                • Alan Shalloway
                  ... Of course Scrum is deficient. Virtually everything is deficient. Things are good for certain things. Not for everything. Scrum is really great for some
                  Message 8 of 16 , Feb 4, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Tobias Mayer"
                    <tobyanon@...> wrote:
                    > Seriously, is this a
                    > statement that Scrum is deficient?
                    >
                    > Tobias
                    >

                    Of course Scrum is deficient. Virtually everything is deficient.
                    Things are good for certain things. Not for everything. Scrum is
                    really great for some things, not for others.

                    To say you can't live on just protein makes protein deficient. But
                    not bad. Scrum is great. It's just that it focuses on teams,
                    projects and customers. It's very good for that. That is not always
                    what the problem is, however. Especially in larger organizations.

                    However, I can't go very far on this discussion group, so I'll leave
                    this at that here.

                    Alan Shalloway

                    >
                    >
                    > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Shalloway" <alshall@>
                    > wrote:
                    > >
                    > > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Dmitry Beransky"
                    > > yahoo@ wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Questions to Alan Shalloway.
                    > > >
                    > > > Alan, my team and I listened to you webinar today and we came
                    out
                    > with two questions:
                    > > >
                    > > > 1) You said that QA's job should be not as much fixing bugs
                    > aspreventing them. Our QA person wanted to know what specifically
                    she
                    > can do (designing acceptance tests and setting up regression tests)
                    to
                    > prevent bugs.
                    > > >
                    > > > 2) You talked about managers still being involved in Scrum.
                    Could
                    > you give a few specific examples of such involvement?
                    > > >
                    > > > Thanks
                    > > > Dmitry
                    > > >
                    > > Dmitry:
                    > > I just noticed this.
                    > >
                    > > Thanks for asking this great question. Questions to the webinar
                    > > should be posted on the Lean Agile Scrum user group I moderate
                    > > (http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/leanagilescrum). The answer to
                    > > this question will go beyond Scrum and this user group is meant
                    to be
                    > > focused on Scrum. In any event, other questions / dialogs about
                    the
                    > > webinar have already been taking place there and you might find
                    them
                    > > interesting as well.
                    > >
                    > > Alan Shalloway
                    > > CEO, Net Objectives
                    > >
                    >
                  • Tobias Mayer
                    But Scrum isn t protein... or carbohydrates. It isn t a thing, rather it is a framework for things. Scrum is a diet plan; it isn t the food. A balanced diet
                    Message 9 of 16 , Feb 4, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      But Scrum isn't protein... or carbohydrates. It isn't a thing, rather
                      it is a framework for things. Scrum is a diet plan; it isn't the food.
                      A balanced diet is deficient if you abuse it, neglect certain aspects of
                      it or assume to know better than the dietician.

                      Okay... ridiculous metaphor ending now. It is too late for this
                      nonsense.

                      Tobias


                      --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Shalloway" <alshall@...>
                      wrote:
                      >
                      > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Tobias Mayer"
                      > tobyanon@ wrote:
                      > > Seriously, is this a
                      > > statement that Scrum is deficient?
                      > >
                      > > Tobias
                      > >
                      >
                      > Of course Scrum is deficient. Virtually everything is deficient.
                      > Things are good for certain things. Not for everything. Scrum is
                      > really great for some things, not for others.
                      >
                      > To say you can't live on just protein makes protein deficient. But
                      > not bad. Scrum is great. It's just that it focuses on teams,
                      > projects and customers. It's very good for that. That is not always
                      > what the problem is, however. Especially in larger organizations.
                      >
                      > However, I can't go very far on this discussion group, so I'll leave
                      > this at that here.
                      >
                      > Alan Shalloway
                      >
                      ...
                      \
                    • Alan Shalloway
                      ... rather ... food. ... aspects of ... OK, bad metaphor. But it s not a framework for _everything_. That s my point. So the question to me is, what is the
                      Message 10 of 16 , Feb 5, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Tobias Mayer"
                        <tobyanon@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > But Scrum isn't protein... or carbohydrates. It isn't a thing,
                        rather
                        > it is a framework for things. Scrum is a diet plan; it isn't the
                        food.
                        > A balanced diet is deficient if you abuse it, neglect certain
                        aspects of
                        > it or assume to know better than the dietician.
                        >
                        > Okay... ridiculous metaphor ending now. It is too late for this
                        > nonsense.
                        >

                        OK, bad metaphor. But it's not a framework for _everything_. That's
                        my point. So the question to me is, what is the scope of Scrum?
                        Where is it good to be applied? Everywhere, for everything? Is
                        anybody claiming that? Scrum can obviously be used for more than
                        software development since its origins were not in software
                        development but rather product development.

                        I believe there are limits to the Scope of Scrum. That doesn't mean
                        I don't like Scrum (See my blog "Praise for Scrum"
                        http://www.netobjectives.com/blogs/praise-for-scrum).

                        Let's look at what I do not believe is part of Scrum. If you think
                        it is, please point me to Scrum materials where these are discussed:

                        1. Focus on time not $$$
                        2. Value stream mapping
                        3. Look to the system for errors when they occur, not the people
                        4. Focus on building smaller pieces of functionality so you can
                        manage product portolios more effectively
                        5. Think in terms of your product lines, not your projects
                        6. One of management's main roles is to educate their staff
                        7. Use design patterns to defer commitment and handle variations in
                        implementation

                        (most of these are lean concepts).

                        Here are some concepts that are not part of Scrum but which most
                        successful Scrum teams have incorporated into their use of Scrum:

                        1. select XP engineering practices (most particularly, up-front
                        testing and continuous integration)
                        2. defining acceptance tests before writing code

                        What is unique to Scrum?
                        I'd say not much since it is a manifestation of Lean principles.

                        I wonder why one can't take the attitude that Scrum isn't everything
                        to everybody without someone thinking I'm attacking Scrum?

                        Now I believe I've still managed to stay within the range of this
                        user group by talking about the scope of Scrum. If you want more
                        information from me on those things outside of Scrum we'll have to
                        do that elsewhere.

                        Alan Shalloway
                        CEO, Net Objectives
                      • Michael James
                        ... I think most of us agree Scrum is an open framework, silent on most issues, raising more questions than it answers. Silence makes people uncomfortable --
                        Message 11 of 16 , Feb 6, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Shalloway" <alshall@...> wrote:

                          > Let's look at what I do not believe is part of Scrum. If you think
                          > it is, please point me to Scrum materials where these are discussed:
                          >
                          > [etc.]

                          I think most of us agree Scrum is an open framework, silent on
                          most issues, raising more questions than it answers. Silence
                          makes people uncomfortable -- we all want to be spoon fed
                          easy answers though at some level we realize there are none.

                          Coaches who *get Scrum* use this silence to shift the
                          responsibility of answering these questions away from the
                          methodologist back to the practitioner. While canned
                          answers work well for some situations, they've failed
                          us badly when applied to uncertain requirements and
                          uncertain technologies.


                          --mj
                        • Alan Shalloway
                          ... I hear people say this, but then I wonder why I am so often attacked for saying Scrum has limits. ... One of my favorite sayings is from Voltaire -
                          Message 12 of 16 , Feb 6, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Michael James"
                            <michael@...> wrote:

                            > I think most of us agree Scrum is an open framework, silent on
                            > most issues, raising more questions than it answers.

                            I hear people say this, but then I wonder why I am so
                            often "attacked" for saying Scrum has limits.

                            >Silence makes people uncomfortable -- we all want to be spoon fed
                            > easy answers though at some level we realize there are none.
                            >

                            One of my favorite sayings is from Voltaire - "Doubt is
                            uncomfortable, certainty is ridiculous."

                            > Coaches who *get Scrum* use this silence to shift the
                            > responsibility of answering these questions away from the
                            > methodologist back to the practitioner. While canned
                            > answers work well for some situations, they've failed
                            > us badly when applied to uncertain requirements and
                            > uncertain technologies.

                            When people are armed with the knowledge to figure out their
                            problems, I let them do that. That is critical. When people don't
                            have the knowledge to figure out their problems, it is negligence to
                            expect them to do so. A good coach can tell the difference. A good
                            coach won't give them answers, but rather guide them with basics or
                            with good questions to get where they need to be. At times, a
                            starting point may be given.

                            If a coach sees that people are looking at the wrong thing, sometimes
                            it is worth saying - hey, look at this, not that! Don't take me too
                            literally here, I would probably set up what if questions, etc.

                            Again, I believe you have re-iterated my point. Scrum is a
                            framework. Perhaps there are other things besides a framework that
                            could be useful to a team and/or enterprise the team is working in.

                            Alan Shalloway
                            CEO, Net Objectives
                          • Simon Kirk
                            ... I see your point, but I do wonder how you feel qualified at the time to assume you know the right starting point. Perhaps I don t understand how much you
                            Message 13 of 16 , Feb 10, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              On 6 Feb 2008, at 17:01, Alan Shalloway wrote:
                              > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Michael James"
                              > <michael@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > > I think most of us agree Scrum is an open framework, silent on
                              > > most issues, raising more questions than it answers.
                              >
                              > I hear people say this, but then I wonder why I am so
                              > often "attacked" for saying Scrum has limits.
                              >
                              > >Silence makes people uncomfortable -- we all want to be spoon fed
                              > > easy answers though at some level we realize there are none.
                              > >
                              >
                              > One of my favorite sayings is from Voltaire - "Doubt is
                              > uncomfortable, certainty is ridiculous."
                              >
                              > > Coaches who *get Scrum* use this silence to shift the
                              > > responsibility of answering these questions away from the
                              > > methodologist back to the practitioner. While canned
                              > > answers work well for some situations, they've failed
                              > > us badly when applied to uncertain requirements and
                              > > uncertain technologies.
                              >
                              > When people are armed with the knowledge to figure out their
                              > problems, I let them do that. That is critical. When people don't
                              > have the knowledge to figure out their problems, it is negligence to
                              > expect them to do so. A good coach can tell the difference. A good
                              > coach won't give them answers, but rather guide them with basics or
                              > with good questions to get where they need to be. At times, a
                              > starting point may be given.
                              >
                              I see your point, but I do wonder how you feel qualified at the time
                              to assume you know the right starting point. Perhaps I don't
                              understand how much you know about "their" situation; I'd be
                              interested in how you make the decision to provide the starting point
                              or not.
                              >
                              >
                              > If a coach sees that people are looking at the wrong thing, sometimes
                              > it is worth saying - hey, look at this, not that! Don't take me too
                              > literally here, I would probably set up what if questions, etc.
                              >
                              > Again, I believe you have re-iterated my point. Scrum is a
                              > framework. Perhaps there are other things besides a framework that
                              > could be useful to a team and/or enterprise the team is working in.
                              >
                              >
                              Here's where I worry about this conversation about the "limits of
                              Scrum" - that is, how does one decide to define limits on a framework
                              that doesn't define an explicit interest in (say) any of the areas you
                              defined in your examples of the limitations of Scrum.

                              What I mean is how can one say any of those examples is a limit of
                              Scrum, when they aren't really what Scrum "talks about". I agree that
                              there are other things besides a framework for the team to discuss,
                              but any of them can be done by the team within their application of
                              Scrum.

                              At that point it's a grey area whether they are within the scope of
                              Scrum or not: for example they're "outside" as they're not explicitly
                              defined by Scrum, but they're "inside" because one can do them within
                              Scrum. For instance (I'm not advocating this by the way) one could
                              define tasks to represent use of design patterns (your point seven),
                              and presto! They're trackable in a burndown, say. Are they within
                              Scrum now, or not?
                            • Alan Shalloway
                              ... time ... point ... Well, working with dozens of teams over the last few years and being associated with other trainers/coaches in our company that have
                              Message 14 of 16 , Feb 10, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Simon Kirk <scrum@...> wrote:
                                >

                                > I see your point, but I do wonder how you feel qualified at the
                                time
                                > to assume you know the right starting point. Perhaps I don't
                                > understand how much you know about "their" situation; I'd be
                                > interested in how you make the decision to provide the starting
                                point
                                > or not.

                                Well, working with dozens of teams over the last few years and being
                                associated with other trainers/coaches in our company that have
                                worked on even more gives me a fair amount of experience. But
                                perhaps more importantly, by understanding Lean principles I can see
                                what is causing the impediments better than the team can.

                                As I've been repeatedly saying, Lean gives insights into how to solve
                                many of the impediments teams face. In other words, I've seen it
                                before. But actually, it doesn't matter if the start is "correct".
                                The team needs to be infused with the attitude of continuously
                                improving their process. Thus, if things are not optimal (they never
                                will be) they will improve it anyway.

                                > >
                                > >
                                > Here's where I worry about this conversation about the "limits of
                                > Scrum" - that is, how does one decide to define limits on a
                                framework
                                > that doesn't define an explicit interest in (say) any of the areas
                                you
                                > defined in your examples of the limitations of Scrum.
                                >
                                > What I mean is how can one say any of those examples is a limit of
                                > Scrum, when they aren't really what Scrum "talks about". I agree
                                that
                                > there are other things besides a framework for the team to
                                discuss,
                                > but any of them can be done by the team within their application
                                of
                                > Scrum.
                                >
                                > At that point it's a grey area whether they are within the scope
                                of
                                > Scrum or not: for example they're "outside" as they're not
                                explicitly
                                > defined by Scrum, but they're "inside" because one can do them
                                within
                                > Scrum. For instance (I'm not advocating this by the way) one could
                                > define tasks to represent use of design patterns (your point
                                seven),
                                > and presto! They're trackable in a burndown, say. Are they within
                                > Scrum now, or not?
                                >

                                Well, I agree that limits may be the wrong word. Scope is probably
                                better. However, in your example, what would be in the scope would
                                be the tracking of design patterns, not the design patterns
                                themselves.

                                Alan Shalloway
                                CEO, Net Objectives
                              • Mike Sutton
                                Most of the points made in this thread are very relevant, I do feel that scope of Scrum is pretty huge. Particularly with the CSM role - remove all/any
                                Message 15 of 16 , Feb 11, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Most of the points made in this thread are very relevant, I do feel
                                  that 'scope' of Scrum is pretty huge. Particularly with the CSM role
                                  - remove all/any obstacle that is impeding the Team's ability to
                                  deliver its commitment.

                                  Thats a pretty tall order that can set the SM on a collision course
                                  with practically everyone in the business - even the team!!

                                  So off all the great points made in this thread, the one that I'm
                                  most pleased at seeing is...

                                  Infusing the team with the attitude of continuous improvement. It is
                                  at the heart of agile. A good coach knows to ask the dumb questions
                                  that create opportunities to inspect. Then adaption becomes something
                                  that can be considered.

                                  thats my tuppence worth.
                                  mike
                                  csm.csp.cspo.certified.certifiable.


                                  --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "Alan
                                  Shalloway" <alshall@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Simon Kirk <scrum@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  >
                                  > > I see your point, but I do wonder how you feel qualified at the
                                  > time
                                  > > to assume you know the right starting point. Perhaps I don't
                                  > > understand how much you know about "their" situation; I'd be
                                  > > interested in how you make the decision to provide the starting
                                  > point
                                  > > or not.
                                  >
                                  > Well, working with dozens of teams over the last few years and
                                  being
                                  > associated with other trainers/coaches in our company that have
                                  > worked on even more gives me a fair amount of experience. But
                                  > perhaps more importantly, by understanding Lean principles I can
                                  see
                                  > what is causing the impediments better than the team can.
                                  >
                                  > As I've been repeatedly saying, Lean gives insights into how to
                                  solve
                                  > many of the impediments teams face. In other words, I've seen it
                                  > before. But actually, it doesn't matter if the start is
                                  "correct".
                                  > The team needs to be infused with the attitude of continuously
                                  > improving their process. Thus, if things are not optimal (they
                                  never
                                  > will be) they will improve it anyway.
                                  >
                                  > > >
                                  > > >
                                  > > Here's where I worry about this conversation about the "limits
                                  of
                                  > > Scrum" - that is, how does one decide to define limits on a
                                  > framework
                                  > > that doesn't define an explicit interest in (say) any of the
                                  areas
                                  > you
                                  > > defined in your examples of the limitations of Scrum.
                                  > >
                                  > > What I mean is how can one say any of those examples is a limit
                                  of
                                  > > Scrum, when they aren't really what Scrum "talks about". I agree
                                  > that
                                  > > there are other things besides a framework for the team to
                                  > discuss,
                                  > > but any of them can be done by the team within their application
                                  > of
                                  > > Scrum.
                                  > >
                                  > > At that point it's a grey area whether they are within the scope
                                  > of
                                  > > Scrum or not: for example they're "outside" as they're not
                                  > explicitly
                                  > > defined by Scrum, but they're "inside" because one can do them
                                  > within
                                  > > Scrum. For instance (I'm not advocating this by the way) one
                                  could
                                  > > define tasks to represent use of design patterns (your point
                                  > seven),
                                  > > and presto! They're trackable in a burndown, say. Are they
                                  within
                                  > > Scrum now, or not?
                                  > >
                                  >
                                  > Well, I agree that limits may be the wrong word. Scope is probably
                                  > better. However, in your example, what would be in the scope
                                  would
                                  > be the tracking of design patterns, not the design patterns
                                  > themselves.
                                  >
                                  > Alan Shalloway
                                  > CEO, Net Objectives
                                  >
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.