RE: [scrumdevelopment] Agile Balance to Extreme Pressure
MessageSteven Gordon wrote:
> I feeljust as passionately that although the
I have already> concept is a very good one that> been practicing in my own way,Steven:Interesting, that makes six different groups since this discussion started thatare doing something similar.Just as I thought, this had to be a *very common thing*.I bet you there is more, maybe even *many more*.Steven Gordon wrote:
class=267545817-01032004> intrinsically more balanced than> it is not
class=267545817-01032004> XP, or any other form of agile> vanilla Scrum,> software development.Ah, but I am not saying is *more* balanced, I am saying that it is an *easierbalance* to achieve, perhaps even a *minimal balance* when you get started.I also not saying is a "better balance" I am just saying it is easier to achieve.I think the strong arguments were clouding the space and making the concepthard to understand, which in my view is *very simple*:- do the simplest thing that works first (get to that "easy" balance) and then,- add more engineering practices (as you stay in balance)It is that easy.There are no promises of being a "better balance" or that an "overall balance"is included. (No grandiose claims, .... just that it is easier.)Steven Gordon wrote:
entire context> Balance is a function of the
organization, customer,> (time, project, team,
agility of the> market, etc.), not just the
meta-methodology).> methodology (orI agree, but I never said that there was an "overall balance" promised in Balanced Agility ;-)Steven Gordon wrote:> To call any methodology "balanced" in and of> itself makes it harder for people to understand> this critical point.Just to clear a few misunderstandings:* Balance Agility is not a methodology is a minimal "engineering starting (balanced) point"using Scrum AND the commitment to stay in balance as you add more engineeringpractices.* It is not "balanced in and of itself", you have to struggle to keep yourbalance at two levels:1) in doing the minimal "right things" to successfully complete thesoftware development cycles when you start scrumming and2) in making sure that what you ask your development staff is realistic.Does this make sense?- Mike
LEFT BRAIN FUNCTIONS
words and language
present and past
math and science
knows object name
RIGHT BRAIN FUNCTIONS
"big picture" oriented
symbols and images
present and future
philosophy & religion
can "get it" (i.e. meaning)
knows object function
- Mike Beedle wrote:
> That is strange isn't it, to be in conflict while arguingRon Jeffries wrote:
> for balance.
> Is it ever really strange to be in conflict when choosingRon:
> to argue?
Well, I could have chosen to stay quiet,
or to not publish or elaborate my idea,
and to let the world be, without Balanced Agility.
But now I am glad I went through that argument,
and through the thorough exploration of the idea --
the world as I see it, will be better with
Yes, I am making this an official announcement, I see
so much value in this idea, I will be writing a book
in the next 3 months with the title:
Balance Agility with Scrum:
The Easy and Minimal Road to
Agile Software Development
Wish me luck.
I will let you know of drafts available for review
on this list!
- On Monday, March 1, 2004, at 1:41:49 PM, Mike Beedle wrote:
> Balance Agility with Scrum:I like the name "Balance Agility with Scrum".
> The Easy and Minimal Road to
> Agile Software Development
And I hope you understand now why a number of us don't like the name
I could be wrong, of course. It's just not the way to bet.