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

Re: [XP] Scrum and XP

Expand Messages
  • andycirillo
    I won t attempt to answer your question because I m kind of wondering the same thing (except that my version is Isn t the XP planning game just a scaled-down
    Message 1 of 20 , May 14, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
      the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
      just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

      I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

      1. Scrum is scalable. There are precedents for having Scrums of
      Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
      across an organization, or on very large teams.

      2. I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
      anything on the XP side. The flow from Product Backlog to Version
      Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
      product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

      3. Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to.
      These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing.
      XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
      a hard time relating to development. Scrum is something they can
      sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
      and development that both sides can understand.

      4. Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP.
      If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
      continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
      mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
      easily.

      My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
      other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
      together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
      being part of XP?"

      --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
      > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
      Planning Game
      > and Scrum. There are subtle differences, but if the team is
      adapting their
      > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
      the other
      > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
      >
      > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
      friendly"
      > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
      programming
      > practices.
      >
      > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
      complicate
      > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
      which is
      > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
      >
      >
      >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
      > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
      > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
      > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
      > >
      > >
      > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
      > >
      > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
      that
      > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
      > >
      > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
      XP
      > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
      project
      > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
      both
      > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
      > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
      for
      > > what the other doesn't address.
      > >
      > > Ken Schwaber
      > >
    • Mike Beedle
      ... Lowell: Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch: the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger scope than the planning game. Let
      Message 2 of 20 , May 15, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
        > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
        > the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
        > differences, but if the team is adapting their
        > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
        > with one versus the other would have make any
        > difference in the outcome of the project.

        Lowell:

        Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
        the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
        scope than the planning game. Let me explain.

        Kent Beck, which invented the "planning game", by his own
        account got a lot of inspiration from Scrum. (Kent if you
        are lurking can you please comment?) So, yes, there is
        a great deal of overlap. And a lot of credit should go
        to Kent for "borrowing" things from Scrum. After all,
        he had the hard job to find and choose the
        "simplest thing that worked for management". And he did,
        he found and chose Scrum, after looking at hundreds if
        not thousands of "management frameworks" over the years.

        However, the Product Backlog in Scrum includes much more
        than the functional user stories. And it is for this
        reason that XP (with the planning game) is different than
        practicing Scrum + XP -- because Scrum includes _all_
        activities, not only the functional software stories.

        So for example, business analysis, business design,
        training, integration, CM, System Test, product upgrades,
        business changes, and _any_ other activities are all part
        of the Scrum Product Backlog, but they wouldn't be part of
        the XP stories.

        For example, Martine Devos and I have used it for in
        the past for BPR (business process reengineering),
        and Jeff and Ken have used it for a myriad of other
        activities related and unrelated to software development.

        In fact, when Ken and I wrote "Agile Software Development
        with Scrum" we made the conscious decision to not mix
        any other software development practices in explaining
        Scrum, because we didn't want people to confuse Scrum
        with being "just another software development method".

        Instead, we wanted to make the statement that Scrum is
        "agile management" and it works for any activity,
        not only software development. In contrast XP minus
        the planning game, is a collection of practices or
        patterns for "agile software engineering".

        You should also know that in our meeting last year at
        Snowbird UT, which got the agilealliance.org started, Kent
        was the most vocal advocate in having a Scrum book written,
        because as he stated, and I am paraphrasing: there weren't
        any reference materials he could quote (with ISBN numbers).

        The only thing available at the time were a few websites:
        http://www.controlchaos.com
        http://www.jeffsutherland.com
        etc.

        and he felt that websites unfortunately are fairly volatile.

        Now of course there is that book, "Agile Software Development
        with Scrum", written by a couple of software rebels
        (with a cause).

        Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
        > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move
        > towards XP in a "non-XP-friendly" environment or
        > simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP programming
        > practices.
        > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would
        > not want to complicate things by introducing Scrum
        > terminology for project management, which is
        > largely redundant to the Planning Game.

        But just remember there _is_ a difference between XP's
        planning game and Scrum. When the sources of change
        are contained within the functional user stories you
        should be ok with XP.

        However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
        best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
        management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
        of many related projects at all levels of the organization.

        How can this be beneficial? Well, there are weird
        examples of Scrum being applied in cases where the
        development tools change in the middle of development
        (databases, IDEs, programming languages, etc.), or
        when _radical_ business changes change the architecture
        of a large system, or when there are issues about coordinating
        the activities of multiple teams: Application teams,
        Testing, CM/Integration, Systems Support, etc.

        In all cases, Scrum continues to deliver through the
        realization of Product Backlog items.

        This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
        for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
        XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
        Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
        throughout.

        More on XBreed at: http://www.xbreed.net

        Btw, the name XBreed, means "cross breed" and it represents
        the genetic combination of Scrum and XP (the combination of patterns).
        And as nature would have it, it represents the survival of
        the strongest genes from cross-breeding three already very
        strong animals:

        Scrum, XP, and Alexanderian Patterns theory/philosophy.

        - Mike

        http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
        We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
        http://www.e-architects.com

        http://www.xbreed.net
        http://www.agilescrum.com
        http://www.livingmetaphor.org

        http://www.agilealliance.org
      • Ken Schwaber
        Scrum is for any development project (we even used it for marketing programs), including software development. XP is for software engineering. Scrum and XP
        Message 3 of 20 , May 15, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Scrum is for any development project (we even used it for marketing
          programs), including software development. XP is for software engineering.
          Scrum and XP work together great on software engineering projects, where
          neither work that well by themselves. Scrum is going to reengineer IT in
          organizations, from over the wall projects owned by IT, to projects owned by
          users that are staffed by responsible XP trained IT teams. XP is a subset of
          Scrum. XP@Scrum.
          Ken

          -----Original Message-----
          From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
          Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:37 AM
          To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP


          I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
          the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
          just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

          I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

          1. Scrum is scalable. There are precedents for having Scrums of
          Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
          across an organization, or on very large teams.

          2. I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
          anything on the XP side. The flow from Product Backlog to Version
          Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
          product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

          3. Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to.
          These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing.
          XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
          a hard time relating to development. Scrum is something they can
          sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
          and development that both sides can understand.

          4. Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP.
          If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
          continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
          mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
          easily.

          My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
          other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
          together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
          being part of XP?"

          --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
          > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
          Planning Game
          > and Scrum. There are subtle differences, but if the team is
          adapting their
          > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
          the other
          > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
          >
          > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
          friendly"
          > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
          programming
          > practices.
          >
          > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
          complicate
          > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
          which is
          > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
          >
          >
          >
          > > -----Original Message-----
          > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
          > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
          > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
          > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
          > >
          > >
          > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
          > >
          > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
          that
          > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
          > >
          > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
          XP
          > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
          project
          > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
          both
          > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
          > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
          for
          > > what the other doesn't address.
          > >
          > > Ken Schwaber
          > >



          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 Beedle
          Andy: Great response. You make a couple of very good points about the separation of concerns (management/engineering) and about the scope of each. However,
          Message 4 of 20 , May 15, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
             
            Andy:
             
            Great response.  You make a couple of very good points about the separation of
            concerns (management/engineering) and about the scope of each.
             
            However, let me focus on your question:  "Is Scrum going to end up just being part of XP?"
             
            Here is my take:  not a chance.  If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum"
            approach, and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.  But many of
            us have already passed that level even 2 years ago.
             
            However, XP@Scrum and XBreed have gone beyond that level by seeking very specific goals
            that will contribute with more agile practices/patterns.
             
            In the case of XP@Scrum the new extra practices will come from the emphasis on
            "Business-Value Driven Development".  I am anxious to get a copy of Ken and Kane's
            new book on  Business-Value Driven Development.  Ken, do you guys have concrete
            date for when we might expect this book?  
             
            In the case of XBreed, the new practices will come from the goal of creating a
            layered framework of reusable components shared among many contributing teams.
             
            - Mike 
             
            -----Original Message-----
            From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
            Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:37 AM
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP

            I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
            the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
            just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

            I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

            1.  Scrum is scalable.  There are precedents for having Scrums of
            Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
            across an organization, or on very large teams.

            2.  I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
            anything on the XP side.  The flow from Product Backlog to Version
            Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
            product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

            3.  Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to. 
            These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing. 
            XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
            a hard time relating to development.  Scrum is something they can
            sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
            and development that both sides can understand.

            4.  Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP. 
            If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
            continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
            mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
            easily.

            My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
            other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
            together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
            being part of XP?"

            --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
            > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
            Planning Game
            > and Scrum.  There are subtle differences, but if the team is
            adapting their
            > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
            the other
            > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
            >
            > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
            friendly"
            > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
            programming
            > practices.
            >
            > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
            complicate
            > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
            which is
            > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
            >
            >
            >
            > > -----Original Message-----
            > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
            > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
            > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
            > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
            > >
            > >
            > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
            > >
            > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
            that
            > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
            > >
            > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
            XP
            > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
            project
            > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
            both
            > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
            > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
            for
            > > what the other doesn't address.
            > >
            > > Ken Schwaber
            > >



            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.
          • Ken Schwaber
            And what a great combination xp@Scrum and XBreed will be!!! No date yet for my book. Ken ... From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@e-architects.com] Sent:
            Message 5 of 20 , May 15, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              And what a great combination xp@Scrum and XBreed will be!!! No date yet for my book.
              Ken
              -----Original Message-----
              From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 8:57 AM
              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP

               
              Andy:
               
              Great response.  You make a couple of very good points about the separation of
              concerns (management/engineering) and about the scope of each.
               
              However, let me focus on your question:  "Is Scrum going to end up just being part of XP?"
               
              Here is my take:  not a chance.  If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum"
              approach, and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.  But many of
              us have already passed that level even 2 years ago.
               
              However, XP@Scrum and XBreed have gone beyond that level by seeking very specific goals
              that will contribute with more agile practices/patterns.
               
              In the case of XP@Scrum the new extra practices will come from the emphasis on
              "Business-Value Driven Development".  I am anxious to get a copy of Ken and Kane's
              new book on  Business-Value Driven Development.  Ken, do you guys have concrete
              date for when we might expect this book?  
               
              In the case of XBreed, the new practices will come from the goal of creating a
              layered framework of reusable components shared among many contributing teams.
               
              - Mike 
               
              -----Original Message-----
              From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 1:37 AM
              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP

              I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
              the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
              just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

              I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

              1.  Scrum is scalable.  There are precedents for having Scrums of
              Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
              across an organization, or on very large teams.

              2.  I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
              anything on the XP side.  The flow from Product Backlog to Version
              Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
              product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

              3.  Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to. 
              These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing. 
              XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
              a hard time relating to development.  Scrum is something they can
              sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
              and development that both sides can understand.

              4.  Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP. 
              If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
              continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
              mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
              easily.

              My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
              other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
              together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
              being part of XP?"

              --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
              > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
              Planning Game
              > and Scrum.  There are subtle differences, but if the team is
              adapting their
              > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
              the other
              > would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.
              >
              > I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
              friendly"
              > environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
              programming
              > practices.
              >
              > If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
              complicate
              > things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
              which is
              > largely redundant to the Planning Game.
              >
              >
              >
              > > -----Original Message-----
              > > From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
              > > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
              > > To: extremeprogramming@y...
              > > Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP
              > >
              > >
              > > On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:
              > >
              > > >> What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
              that
              > > >> Scrum is a subset of XP.
              > >
              > > I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
              XP
              > > better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
              project
              > > management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
              both
              > > use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
              > > collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
              for
              > > what the other doesn't address.
              > >
              > > Ken Schwaber
              > >



              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.


              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.
            • Lowell Lindstrom
              ... I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names. For
              Message 6 of 20 , May 15, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                > > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
                > > the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
                > > differences, but if the team is adapting their
                > > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
                > > with one versus the other would have make any
                > > difference in the outcome of the project.
                >
                > Lowell:
                >
                > Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
                > the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
                > scope than the planning game. Let me explain.
                >
                > [background clipped.....]

                I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we
                have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names.
                For the practitioner, I don't believe that the historical relationship
                between XP and Scrum are important. My main point was that if you are
                evolving your practices, XP Planning (or Scrum) will evolve to include the
                parts of the Scrum (or XP) that it needs. I don't need to confuse the
                process by introducing Scrum terminology (XP Planning terminology). From
                the first XP Immersion course, when the questioned was raised about
                documentation and other "stories" that don't end up as software tasks, the
                answer has been "if you need them, you can make them stories and plan them
                with the planning game." Adapt as you need based on feedback from the
                process.

                They will evolve to the same result in practice without the shift in
                terminology. The XP@Scrum thing seems forced to me, unless I am in an
                existing Scrum shop. If I am with a team that is new to both, I am
                introducing un-needed complexity with redundant practices. XP Planning is
                sufficient in this case.

                I am not advocating XP over Scrum or vice versa. It is the combination
                that, to me, that has unneeded complexity for the new team.

                >
                > However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
                > best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
                > management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
                > of many related projects at all levels of the organization.
                >

                I am unclear why I need to rename everything when the practices are
                basically the same. Why is it not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                terminology, in this case, and use the practices on non-functional stories?
                This seems much more simple to me. I just don't see much benefit to balance
                against the cost of re-learning. This becomes particularly important in
                larger organizations.

                >
                > This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                > for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                > XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                > Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                > throughout.
                >

                Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional practices to Scrum,
                XP, and Patterns? Having yet another agile method that primarily overlaps
                with others seems like forced complexity. If we were talking about code,
                wouldn't we refactor these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are
                going to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather than grow and
                adapt the toolkit of agile practices as we learn more and apply these ideas
                to new domains and technologies.
              • Ken Schwaber
                Lowell, The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is more understood,
                Message 7 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  Lowell,
                  The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize the overlapping
                  names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is more understood,
                  more business natural. It fits with business project and product managers.
                  XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien to this audience. It's
                  our way to get agile used with XP engineering practices. It eases the
                  implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                  organization.
                  Ken

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                  Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 10:53 AM
                  To: 'extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com';
                  scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: [XP] Scrum and XP


                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                  > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                  > > I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
                  > > the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
                  > > differences, but if the team is adapting their
                  > > work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
                  > > with one versus the other would have make any
                  > > difference in the outcome of the project.
                  >
                  > Lowell:
                  >
                  > Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
                  > the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
                  > scope than the planning game. Let me explain.
                  >
                  > [background clipped.....]

                  I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we
                  have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names.
                  For the practitioner, I don't believe that the historical relationship
                  between XP and Scrum are important. My main point was that if you are
                  evolving your practices, XP Planning (or Scrum) will evolve to include the
                  parts of the Scrum (or XP) that it needs. I don't need to confuse the
                  process by introducing Scrum terminology (XP Planning terminology). From
                  the first XP Immersion course, when the questioned was raised about
                  documentation and other "stories" that don't end up as software tasks, the
                  answer has been "if you need them, you can make them stories and plan them
                  with the planning game." Adapt as you need based on feedback from the
                  process.

                  They will evolve to the same result in practice without the shift in
                  terminology. The XP@Scrum thing seems forced to me, unless I am in an
                  existing Scrum shop. If I am with a team that is new to both, I am
                  introducing un-needed complexity with redundant practices. XP Planning is
                  sufficient in this case.

                  I am not advocating XP over Scrum or vice versa. It is the combination
                  that, to me, that has unneeded complexity for the new team.

                  >
                  > However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
                  > best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
                  > management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
                  > of many related projects at all levels of the organization.
                  >

                  I am unclear why I need to rename everything when the practices are
                  basically the same. Why is it not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                  terminology, in this case, and use the practices on non-functional stories?
                  This seems much more simple to me. I just don't see much benefit to balance
                  against the cost of re-learning. This becomes particularly important in
                  larger organizations.

                  >
                  > This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                  > for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                  > XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                  > Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                  > throughout.
                  >

                  Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional practices to Scrum,
                  XP, and Patterns? Having yet another agile method that primarily overlaps
                  with others seems like forced complexity. If we were talking about code,
                  wouldn't we refactor these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are
                  going to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather than grow and
                  adapt the toolkit of agile practices as we learn more and apply these ideas
                  to new domains and technologies.



                  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/
                • Linda Rising
                  We had some real Scrum enthusiasts who said: If you can t Scrum it, don t do it :-)!
                  Message 8 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    We had some real Scrum enthusiasts who said: If you can't Scrum it, don't do it :-)!



                    Ken Schwaber wrote:
                    Scrum is for any development project (we even used it for marketing
                    programs), including software development. XP is for software engineering.
                    Scrum and XP work together great on software engineering projects, where
                    neither work that well by themselves. Scrum is going to reengineer IT in
                    organizations, from over the wall projects owned by IT, to projects owned by
                    users that are staffed by responsible XP trained IT teams. XP is a subset of
                    Scrum. XP@Scrum.
                    Ken

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: andycirillo [mailto:acirillo@...]
                    Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 2:37 AM
                    To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: [XP] Scrum and XP


                    I won't attempt to answer your question because I'm kind of wondering
                    the same thing (except that my version is 'Isn't the XP planning game
                    just a scaled-down version of Scrum?')

                    I would like to make a few comments in support of Scrum however:

                    1. Scrum is scalable. There are precedents for having Scrums of
                    Scrums of Scrums, which is critical if you want to use agile methods
                    across an organization, or on very large teams.

                    2. I think the Scrum concept of a backlog is more sophisticated than
                    anything on the XP side. The flow from Product Backlog to Version
                    Backlog to Sprint Backlog gives you a nice clean way to manage a
                    product roadmap without sacrificing flexibility.

                    3. Scrum is something that professional managers can relate to.
                    These guys don't care about continuous integration or unit testing.
                    XP is largely outside of their world, which means that they will have
                    a hard time relating to development. Scrum is something they can
                    sink their teeth into, and it can act as a 'contract' between them
                    and developm ent that both sides can understand.

                    4. Like you said, Scrum can be an easier way to "go agile" than XP.
                    If you're walking into an environment with no unit tests, no
                    continuous integration and developers that break out in hives at the
                    mention of pair programming, you can still implement Scrum fairly
                    easily.

                    My impression is that both XP and Scrum have crude 'stubs' of each
                    other built into them, which suggests that they were meant to be used
                    together - which begs the question, "Is Scrum going to end up just
                    being part of XP?"

                    --- In scrumdevelopment@y..., Lowell Lindstrom <lindstrom@o...> wrote:
                    I can't seem to find a substantial difference between the XP
                    Planning Game
                    and Scrum.  There are subtle differences, but if the team is
                    adapting their
                    work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting with one versus
                    the other
                    would have make any difference in the outcome of the project.

                    I can see how Scrum would be a way to move towards XP in a "non-XP-
                    friendly"
                    environment or simply a way to be Agile, if I not using XP
                    programming
                    practices.

                    If I am in an "XP-friendly" environment, I would not want to
                    complicate
                    things by introducing Scrum terminology for project management,
                    which is
                    largely redundant to the Planning Game.



                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: kschwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@v...]
                    Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 2:00 PM
                    To: extremeprogramming@y...
                    Subject: [XP] Scrum and XP


                    On May 12, Ron Jefferies wrote:

                    What does Scrum seem to have that XP does not? It seems to me
                    that
                    Scrum is a subset of XP.
                    I used to think that XP was a subset of Scrum until I understood
                    XP
                    better. Then I understood that Scrum is a set of business and
                    project
                    management practices, XP is a set of engineering practices. They
                    both
                    use iterations, increments, emergence, self-organization, and
                    collaboration, so I've been able to use each of them to make up
                    for
                    what the other doesn't address.

                    Ken Schwaber




                    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/




                    ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                    Buy Stock for $4
                    and no minimums.
                    FREE Money 2002.
                    http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                    ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                    To Post a message, s end 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/




                  • Linda Rising
                    Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but Scrum took off like a rocket! Linda
                    Message 9 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but Scrum took off
                      like a rocket!




                      Linda



                      Ken Schwaber wrote:
                      Lowell,
                      The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize the overlapping
                      names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is more understood,
                      more business natural. It fits with business project and product managers.
                      XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien to this audience. It's
                      our way to get agile used with XP engineering practices. It eases the
                      implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                      organization.
                      Ken

                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                      Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 10:53 AM
                      To: 'extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com';
                      scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: [sc rumdevelopment] RE: [XP] Scrum and XP


                      -----Original Message-----
                      From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                      Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                      I can't seem to find a substantial difference between
                      the XP Planning Game and Scrum. There are subtle
                      differences, but if the team is adapting their
                      work as they proceed, I can't see why I starting
                      with one versus the other would have make any
                      difference in the outcome of the project.
                      Lowell:

                      Your assessment is correct. However, there is a glitch:
                      the planning game is like Scrum, but Scrum has a larger
                      scope than the planning game. Let me explain.

                      [background clipped.....]

                      I appreciate the background. I think it gives some explanation as to why we
                      have two sets of practices that are so similar, yet have different names.
                      For the practitioner, I don't believe that the historical relationship
                      between XP and Scrum are important. My main point was that if you are
                      evolving your practices, XP Planning (or Scrum) will evolve to include the
                      parts of the Scrum (or XP) that it needs. I don't need to confuse the
                      process by introducing Scrum terminology (XP Planning terminology). From
                      the first XP Immersion course, when the questioned was raised about
                      documentation and other "stories" that don't end up as software tasks, the
                      answer has been "if you need them, you can make them stories and plan them
                      with the planning game." Adapt as you need based on feedback from the
                      process.

                      They will evolve to the same result in practice without the shift in
                      terminology. The XP@Scrum thing see ms forced to me, unless I am in an
                      existing Scrum shop. If I am with a team that is new to both, I am
                      introducing un-needed complexity with redundant practices. XP Planning is
                      sufficient in this case.

                      I am not advocating XP over Scrum or vice versa. It is the combination
                      that, to me, that has unneeded complexity for the new team.

                      However, when all sort of things start to change, it is probably
                      best to move to Scrum because Scrum provides and agile
                      management framework to manage _all_ of the activities
                      of many related projects at all levels of the organization.


                      I am unclear why I need to rename everything when the practices are
                      basically the same. Why is it not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                      terminology, in this case, and use the practices on non-functional stories?
                      This seems much more simple to me. I just don't see much benefit to balance
                      against the cost of re-learning. This becomes particularly important in
                      larger organizations.

                      This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                      for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                      XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                      Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                      throughout.


                      Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional practices to Scrum,
                      XP, and Patterns? Having yet another agile method that primarily overlaps
                      with others seems like forced complexity. If we were talking about code,
                      wouldn't we refactor these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are
                      going to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather than grow and
                      adapt the toolkit of agile practices as we learn more and apply these ideas
                      to new domains and technologies.



                      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/



                      ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                      Buy Stock for $4
                      and no minimums.
                      FREE Money 2002.
                      http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                      ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                      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/




                    • Lowell Lindstrom
                      Linda and Ken - Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the
                      Message 10 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Linda and Ken -

                        Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting
                        business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the technical
                        folks are more difficult given the emotion around pairing.

                        Linda, was it the business people that were the obstacle until you switched
                        from XP to Scrum or the developers? What did people like about Scrum? Did
                        the rocket of Scrum adoption lead to greater acceptance of the XP practices?

                        Ken, I would guess that you always lead with Scrum? Have you ever tried to
                        introduce XP only. I wouldn't expect so and I don't mean that as a
                        challenge. I am just interested in what you have experienced.

                        As I stated before, my point here is not to advocate XP over Scrum or vice
                        versa. I know one much better than the other, so that is my comfort zone,
                        that is where I can improvise with the greatest ease. I am mainly trying to
                        learn more about Scrum. I read the book to learn how Scrum could supplement
                        XP Planning for organizations that are scaling XP and dealing with multiple
                        team planning issues. It is still not clear to me why I would bring in
                        Scrum rather than simply take the couple of different practices and evolve
                        XP in that direction. I see teams doing this anyway who haven't even heard
                        of Scrum.

                        Thanks for the dialog!

                        Lowell

                        =============
                        Lowell Lindstrom
                        Object Mentor, Inc.
                        Agile Universe / XP Universe August 4-7, 2002
                        http://www.agileuniverse.com
                        Beck, Boehm, Humphreys, Cockburn, Jeffries, Fowler talkin' Agile and XP!!!



                        > From: Linda Rising <risingl@...>
                        >
                        > Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but
                        > Scrum took off like a rocket!
                        >
                        > Ken Schwaber wrote:
                        >
                        > >Lowell,
                        > >The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize
                        > the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is
                        more
                        > understood, more business natural. It fits with business project and
                        > product managers. XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien
                        to
                        > this audience. It's our way to get agile used with XP engineering
                        practices. It eases the
                        > >implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                        organization.
                        > >Ken
                        > >
                      • Lowell Lindstrom
                        ... I agree with Mike. I don t see this happening, nor do I think anyone needs it to happen. ... Mike, here I do not understand. Your response comes across
                        Message 11 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > From: "Mike Beedle" <beedlem@...>
                          > Subject: RE: Re: [XP] Scrum and XP
                          >
                          > However, let me focus on your question: "Is Scrum going to
                          > end up just being part of XP?"
                          >
                          > Here is my take: not a chance.

                          I agree with Mike. I don't see this happening, nor do I think anyone needs
                          it to happen.

                          > If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum" approach,
                          > and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.

                          Mike, here I do not understand. Your response comes across to me as if you
                          feel threatened, as if XP and Scrum are in some kinda of competition with
                          each other. Perhaps I am misreading.

                          You and Ken have had good experiences using practices from both XP and
                          Scrum. I already see XP Teams naturally evolving to practices that greatly
                          resemble parts of Scrum (Scrum or scrums, more formal management of stories,
                          etc.). They don't call it Scrum because they have never heard of Scrum. I
                          don't see why we care whether XP becomes Scrum, Scrum becomes XP, or
                          everything is communicated under the umbrella of Agile Best Practices. To
                          debate that seems to miss the point, which we all seem to agree is to find
                          better ways to deliver business value through software development.

                          Lowell

                          ====================
                          Lowell Lindstrom
                          Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                          lindstrom@...
                        • Mike Beedle
                          ... Lowell: As long as you know what things mean for you, go for it, use the names that make sense to you and your project. In different environments I use
                          Message 12 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                            > I am unclear why I need to rename everything when
                            > the practices are basically the same. Why is it
                            > not sufficient to simply keep the XP Planning
                            > terminology, in this case, and use the practices
                            > on non-functional stories? This seems much more
                            > simple to me. I just don't see much benefit
                            > to balance against the cost of re-learning. This
                            > becomes particularly important in larger organizations.

                            Lowell:

                            As long as you know what things mean for you, go for it,
                            use the names that make sense to you and your project.

                            In different environments I use these equivalences:

                            Product Owner --> typically it is in the Customer's
                            organization (too many titles to list,
                            but an example is "Chief Privacy Officer")
                            Product Backlog Items --> Stories, Features or even UCs
                            Sprint Backlog Items --> Tasks
                            Scrum Master --> Team Leader (when you have a strong
                            technical team)
                            Scrum Master --> Team Leader/Technical Leader
                            (when the team is technically weak)

                            In environments where the Scrum Master is not technical
                            and the team is not technically strong to distribute the
                            role, a new role is needed in addition:

                            Coach --> Technical Lead, Architect, (our
                            architects _always_ code at least
                            50% of the time, and mentor other in
                            design principles, patterns, and method)

                            Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                            > Mike Beedle wrote:
                            > > This difference is in fact the source of inspiration
                            > > for what we practice at Hipaa Accelerator and e-Architects:
                            > > XBreed, which is Scrum for management, XP for engineering,
                            > > Alexanderian ideas, and a few new original ideas mixed
                            > > throughout.
                            >
                            > Did you consider expressing XBreed as simply additional
                            > practices to Scrum, XP, and Patterns? Having yet
                            > another agile method that primarily overlaps with
                            > others seems like forced complexity.

                            We use a different names for 2 main reasons:

                            1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                            because we don't like to say that we do is
                            XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                            that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.

                            2) and because we like to remember,
                            "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                            specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                            is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                            is reusability. So we abstract these special
                            combinations with a name rather than tell people:

                            * use XP
                            * use Scrum but
                            * have Scrum of Scrums that include multiple teams
                            and discuss Global Product Backlogs
                            * have Scum of Scrums among individual teams that
                            discuss Application Product Backlogs
                            * Released product in terms of code bases that
                            adhere to a layered architecture
                            * communicate releases using formatted templates
                            * Do layered testing for integration with the
                            code bases resulting from the layered architecture
                            etc., etc., etc.,

                            This description is already too long for anyone to
                            understand, so we simply say do XBreed == apply all the
                            patterns that were bagged in that collection.

                            Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                            > If we were talking about code, wouldn't we refactor
                            > these to avoid the duplication? It feels like we are going
                            > to brand a new methodolgy with every project rather
                            > than grow and adapt the toolkit of agile practices
                            > as we learn more and apply these ideas to new
                            > domains and technologies.

                            That is certainly the spirit of agility: use whatever makes
                            sense to you -- deep down, it is just one huge latent
                            Org Pattern Language anyhow.

                            (From 1996 to 1998 I spent some time in putting together
                            a Common Pattern Language for Organizations: it included
                            Scrum, Episodes (XP), Coplien's patterns, Patterns for
                            Customer relationships, System Test, etc. This project
                            is still alive, I think, and is in the hands of Jim Coplien
                            and a few other people. Our goal was to put together the
                            grand collection of org patterns and then offer people
                            the freedom to choose valid "sequences" to traverse
                            the pattern language. Each sequence would yield basically
                            to a different way of doing things i.e. a customized
                            method.)

                            So in terms of code and patterns, what we have done with
                            xP@Scrum and XBreed is choose a special "sequence" of patterns
                            in the Alexanderian sense.

                            Having said that, I don't think there are any 2 projects that
                            are identical, so the instantiation process, by default,
                            always implies differences. And these differences come
                            from either naming the practices differently, the roles
                            differently; or by simply choosing a different set of
                            practices.

                            In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                            a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                            yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                            However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                            is any human that likes to be called a monkey
                            (and perhaps vice versa),

                            - Mike

                            http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
                            We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
                            http://www.e-architects.com

                            http://www.xbreed.net
                            http://www.agilescrum.com
                            http://www.livingmetaphor.org

                            http://www.agilealliance.org

                            http://www.mikebeedle.com
                          • Lowell Lindstrom
                            ... I can definitely see wanting to avoid the are you doing XP(Scrum)? debate. But you are doing XP and Scrum, plus MORE. What s interesting is the more
                            Message 13 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              > We use a different names for 2 main reasons:
                              >
                              > 1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                              > because we don't like to say that we do is
                              > XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                              > that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.
                              >

                              I can definitely see wanting to avoid the "are you doing XP(Scrum)? debate."
                              But you are doing XP and Scrum, plus MORE. What's interesting is the "more"
                              part, that variance, not the XP and Scrum. That is where the attention
                              should be. Naming the superset distracts from that.

                              > 2) and because we like to remember,
                              > "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                              > specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                              > is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                              > is reusability. So we abstract these special
                              > combinations with a name rather than tell people:
                              >

                              Thanks! I understand a little better. Somehow I missed that each had a
                              different emphasis. I was under the impression that they were both simply
                              different combinations of XP and Scrum.

                              The name proliferation seems not agile to me. It introduces unnecessary
                              complexity. Surely XBreed projects want business value and XP@Scrum
                              projects want reuse. A better approach is to emphasize only what is unique,
                              rather than the rename the whole set. What are the set of practices that
                              when added to what we know as Scrum and XP lead to higher reuse? That is a
                              set of practices that warrants a new label, not the superset. Same with
                              XP@Scrum. What are the practices that when added to what we know as Scrum
                              and XP deliver higher business value? Call that XP@Scrum (or BVD). If it
                              is just XP, with Scrum replacing the planning game, just call it "XP with
                              Scrum as the Planning Game" or "Scrum using XP Practices for the software
                              development."

                              > In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                              > a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                              > yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                              > However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                              > is any human that likes to be called a monkey

                              Nicely phrased! Yes, I am aware that egos are involve here ;-). I just hope
                              they can be kept in check enough not to kill the movement. A proliferation
                              of differently names sets of methods that are basically identical has that
                              risk associated with it.

                              Lowell

                              ====================
                              Lowell Lindstrom
                              Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                              lindstrom@...
                            • Linda Rising
                              Hi Lowell, I couldn t sell management on: pair programming code ownership actually these were struggles for both management & developers. You know, now that I
                              Message 14 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hi Lowell,

                                I couldn't sell management on:

                                pair programming
                                code ownership

                                actually these were struggles for both management & developers.

                                You know, now that I think about what was going on at the time. I wasn't selling XP,
                                someone else was and maybe he was a bit too enthusiastic...memory fading here.
                                Gotta think about this some more...

                                I personally was selling Scrum and because of a set of lucky coincidences, I believe
                                I had learned how to sell new ideas. In fact, I'm writing a book of patterns about what
                                I did -- with my good friend, Mary Lynn Manns.

                                I gave a lot of talks locally about both XP and Scrum -- other companies and the
                                local ACM/IEEE/SPIN. Most seemed to be more interested in Scrum than XP
                                but, of course, I didn't work at all the places represented and usually never followed
                                up. The ones I did know about really never used either.

                                When I moved to Denmark for a year -- same thing -- gave a lot of talks -- most
                                people in Europe had heard of XP but no one knew anything about Scrum. Again,
                                they were interested but I'm not sure how many actually implemented either one.

                                I'm not feeling like I answered your question, Lowell!!!






                                Linda











                                Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                Linda and Ken -

                                Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting
                                business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the technical
                                folks are more difficult given the emotion around pairing.

                                Linda, was it the business people that were the obstacle until you switched
                                from XP to Scrum or the developers? What did people like about Scrum? Did
                                the rocket of Scrum adoption lead to greater acceptance of the XP practices?

                                Ken, I would guess that you always lead with Scrum? Have you ever tried to
                                introduce XP only. I wouldn't expect so and I don't mean that as a
                                challenge. I am just interested in what you have experienced.

                                As I stated before, my point here is not to advocate XP over Scrum or vice
                                versa. I know one much better than the other, so that is my comfort zone,
                                that is where I can improvise with the greatest ease. I am mainly trying to
                                learn more about Scrum. I rea d the book to learn how Scrum could supplement
                                XP Planning for organizations that are scaling XP and dealing with multiple
                                team planning issues. It is still not clear to me why I would bring in
                                Scrum rather than simply take the couple of different practices and evolve
                                XP in that direction. I see teams doing this anyway who haven't even heard
                                of Scrum.

                                Thanks for the dialog!

                                Lowell

                                =============
                                Lowell Lindstrom
                                Object Mentor, Inc.
                                Agile Universe / XP Universe August 4-7, 2002
                                http://www.agileuniverse.com
                                Beck, Boehm, Humphreys, Cockburn, Jeffries, Fowler talkin' Agile and XP!!!



                                   From: Linda Rising <risingl@...>

                                Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but
                                Scrum took off like a rocket!

                                Ken Schwaber wrote:

                                Lowell,
                                The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize
                                the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is
                                more 
                                understood, more business natural. It fits with business project and 
                                product managers. XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien
                                to 
                                this audience. It's our way to get agile used with XP engineering
                                practices. It eases the
                                implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                                organization.
                                Ken


                                ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                                Buy Stock for $4
                                and no minimums.
                                FREE Money 2002.
                                http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                                ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                                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/




                              • Linda Rising
                                A follow-on thought. At the time I thought that pair programming would provide incredible benefit if we only knew how to implement it. I still believe that and
                                Message 15 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  A follow-on thought. At the time I thought that pair programming would provide
                                  incredible benefit if we only knew how to implement it. I still believe that and I'm
                                  really, really happy that Laurie Williams has been doing some research to measure
                                  it. Of course, it doesn't matter what kind of wonderful research you have -- this is
                                  an emotional issue and everyone always falls back on -- well, that doesn't apply
                                  here :-)! You gotta get around those deeper issues. It's like finding out what
                                  customers *really* want -- when they may not know themselves :-)! Interesting
                                  challenge.






                                  Linda Rising wrote:
                                  Hi Lowell,

                                  I couldn't sell management on:

                                  pair programming
                                  code ownership

                                  actually these were struggles for both management & developers.

                                  You know, now that I think about what was going on at the time. I wasn't selling XP,
                                  someone else was and maybe he was a bit too enthusiastic...memory fading here.
                                  Gotta think about this some more...

                                  I personally was selling Scrum and because of a set of lucky coincidences, I believe
                                  I had learned how to sell new ideas. In fact, I'm writing a book of patterns about what
                                  I did -- with my good friend, Mary Lynn Manns.

                                  I gave a lot of talks locally about both XP and Scrum -- other companies and the
                                  local ACM/IEEE/SPIN. Most seemed to be more interested in Scrum than XP
                                  but, of course, I didn't work at all the places represented and usually never followed
                                  up. The ones I did know about really never used either.

                                  When I moved to Denmark for a year -- same thing -- gave a lot of talks -- most
                                  people in Europe had heard of XP but no one knew anything about Scrum. Again,
                                  they were interested but I'm not sure how many actually implemented either one.

                                  I'm not feeling like I answered your question, Lowell!!!






                                  Linda











                                  Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                  Linda and Ken -

                                  Can you provide some more detail here? I have had no more trouble getting
                                  business people engaged in XP than technical. In fact, often the technical
                                  folks are more difficult given the emotion around pairing.

                                  Linda, was it the business people that were the obstacle until you switched
                                  from XP to Scrum or the developers? What did people like about Scrum? Did
                                  the rocket of Scrum adoption lead to greater acceptance of the XP practices?

                                  Ken, I would guess that you always lead with Scrum? Have you ever tried to
                                  introduce XP only. I wouldn't expect so and I don't mean that as a
                                  challenge. I am just interested in what you have experienced.

                                  As I stated before, my point here is not to advocate XP over Scrum or vice
                                  versa. I know one much better than the other, so that is my comfort zone,
                                  that is where I can improvise with the greatest ease. I am mainly trying to
                                  learn more about Scrum. I r ea
                                  d the book to learn how Scrum could supplement
                                  XP Planning for organizations that are scaling XP and dealing with multiple
                                  team planning issues. It is still not clear to me why I would bring in
                                  Scrum rather than simply take the couple of different practices and evolve
                                  XP in that direction. I see teams doing this anyway who haven't even heard
                                  of Scrum.

                                  Thanks for the dialog!

                                  Lowell

                                  =============
                                  Lowell Lindstrom
                                  Object Mentor, Inc.
                                  Agile Universe / XP Universe August 4-7, 2002
                                  http://www.agileuniverse.com
                                  Beck, Boehm, Humphreys, Cockburn, Jeffries, Fowler talkin' Agile and XP!!!



                                     From: Linda Rising <risingl@...>

                                  Maybe that explains why I was never able to sell XP to our company but
                                  Scrum took off like a rocket!

                                  Ken Schwaber wrote:

                                  Lowell,
                                  The reason why we go through the extra effort to rationalize
                                  the overlapping names between Scrum and XP is that Scrum terminology is
                                  more 
                                  understood, more business natural. It fits with business project and 
                                  product managers. XP is more OO and engineering-centric and feels alien
                                  to 
                                  this audience. It's our way to get agile used with XP engineering
                                  practices. It eases the
                                  implementation of XP and allows us to scale XP elsewhere in the
                                  organization.
                                  Ken


                                  ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
                                  Buy Stock for $4
                                  and no minimums.
                                  FREE Money 2002.
                                  http://us.click.yahoo.com/orkH0C/n97DAA/Ey.GAA/9EfwlB/TM
                                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

                                  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 .

                                • Mike Beedle
                                  ... Lowell: I disagree. I feel it clarifies the purpose. The problem also is that is not only +more as you point out above, but in many cases is: +more
                                  Message 16 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                    > > We use a different names for 2 main reasons:
                                    > >
                                    > > 1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                                    > > because we don't like to say that we do is
                                    > > XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                                    > > that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.
                                    > >
                                    >
                                    > I can definitely see wanting to avoid the "are you doing
                                    > XP(Scrum)? debate." But you are doing XP and Scrum,
                                    > plus MORE. What's interesting is the "more"
                                    > part, that variance, not the XP and Scrum. That is
                                    > where the attention should be. Naming the superset
                                    > distracts from that.

                                    Lowell:

                                    I disagree. I feel it clarifies the purpose.

                                    The problem also is that is not only +more as you point
                                    out above, but in many cases is:

                                    +more +modifying or specializing something in
                                    Scrum or XP. For example, there are highly specialized
                                    Scrum of Scrums in an XBreed environment, we don't
                                    only care about Product Backlog, but about many
                                    Backlogs with dependencies. So even when the
                                    spirit of Scrum survives, the meeting is structured
                                    around different buckets.

                                    Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                    > > 2) and because we like to remember,
                                    > > "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                                    > > specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                                    > > is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                                    > > is reusability. So we abstract these special
                                    > > combinations with a name rather than tell people:
                                    > >
                                    >
                                    > Thanks! I understand a little better. Somehow I missed
                                    > that each had a different emphasis. I was under the
                                    > impression that they were both simply different
                                    > combinations of XP and Scrum.

                                    Unfortunately, Ken and I, and the people that we associate with
                                    are typically on the trenches, so we have had little time
                                    to explain things better.

                                    Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                    > The name proliferation seems not agile to me. It introduces unnecessary
                                    > complexity. Surely XBreed projects want business value and XP@Scrum
                                    > projects want reuse. A better approach is to emphasize only what
                                    > is unique, rather than the rename the whole set. What are
                                    > the set of practices that when added to what we know as
                                    > Scrum and XP lead to higher reuse? That is a set of practices that
                                    > warrants a new label, not the superset. Same with XP@Scrum. What
                                    > are the practices that when added to what we know as Scrum
                                    > and XP deliver higher business value? Call that XP@Scrum (or BVD).
                                    > If it is just XP, with Scrum replacing the planning game, just
                                    > call it "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game" or "Scrum using
                                    > XP Practices for the software development."

                                    Unfortunately, there are many modifications so it can't be
                                    expressed by something as simple as:

                                    "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game"

                                    That is a starting point, and in fact, that's more or less
                                    how XBreed started, but once the focus changed, the sentence
                                    became a paragraph, the paragraph became a chapter, and
                                    pretty soon you have something new.

                                    I suspect the same thing is going on with xp@Scrum.

                                    Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                    > > In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                                    > > a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                                    > > yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                                    > > However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                                    > > is any human that likes to be called a monkey
                                    >
                                    > Nicely phrased! Yes, I am aware that egos are involve here ;-).
                                    > I just hope they can be kept in check enough not to
                                    > kill the movement. A proliferation of differently names
                                    > sets of methods that are basically identical has that
                                    > risk associated with it.

                                    Well, I didn't mean to say anything related to egos.

                                    My point was that simple changes in the meta-architecture of
                                    a system (genotype) can yield to big changes in the overall
                                    structure of the instances (phenotype), and that they
                                    may deserve a different abstraction - a different word.

                                    Actually, we did discuss "name proliferation" at our initial
                                    meeting at Snowbird, and we encouraged each other to explore
                                    and try new things without trying to "unify" things ;-)

                                    Diversity makes us stronger,

                                    - Mike


                                    http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
                                    We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
                                    http://www.e-architects.com

                                    http://www.xbreed.net
                                    http://www.agilescrum.com
                                    http://www.livingmetaphor.org

                                    http://www.agilealliance.org

                                    http://www.mikebeedle.com
                                  • Ken Schwaber
                                    Lowell, I agree with all of your sentiments. I lead with Scrum because I know it best since I m more of a product manager and project manager at this point
                                    Message 17 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Lowell,
                                      I agree with all of your sentiments.

                                      I lead with Scrum because I know it best since I'm more of a product manager
                                      and project manager at this point than a developer. I probably couldn't lead
                                      with XP because of the change management required for the engineering
                                      practices. This doesn't mean that XP's engineering practices aren't needed!!
                                      When the engineering practices are weak, as they are at almost IT shops
                                      doing web development, I recommend XP and have recently been brining in
                                      buildmasters or scrummasters from ThoughtWorks to implement them for the
                                      customer while the project is underway.

                                      I can bring Scrum in and within 1 day have the team developing software,
                                      "the art of the possible." If their engineering practices are weak, the
                                      productivity is lower and the bugs are many. As the engineering practices
                                      improve, so do the increments of functionality. This way XP slips in bit by
                                      bit rather than being a big "let's study it."

                                      Ken

                                      -----Original Message-----
                                      From: Lowell Lindstrom [mailto:lindstrom@...]
                                      Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 4:56 PM
                                      To: 'scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com'
                                      Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: Re: [XP] Scrum and XP


                                      > From: "Mike Beedle" <beedlem@...>
                                      > Subject: RE: Re: [XP] Scrum and XP
                                      >
                                      > However, let me focus on your question: "Is Scrum going to
                                      > end up just being part of XP?"
                                      >
                                      > Here is my take: not a chance.

                                      I agree with Mike. I don't see this happening, nor do I think anyone needs
                                      it to happen.

                                      > If anything, XP might eventually adopt a "full Scrum" approach,
                                      > and eventually get closer to a full gene mix of XP and Scrum.

                                      Mike, here I do not understand. Your response comes across to me as if you
                                      feel threatened, as if XP and Scrum are in some kinda of competition with
                                      each other. Perhaps I am misreading.

                                      You and Ken have had good experiences using practices from both XP and
                                      Scrum. I already see XP Teams naturally evolving to practices that greatly
                                      resemble parts of Scrum (Scrum or scrums, more formal management of stories,
                                      etc.). They don't call it Scrum because they have never heard of Scrum. I
                                      don't see why we care whether XP becomes Scrum, Scrum becomes XP, or
                                      everything is communicated under the umbrella of Agile Best Practices. To
                                      debate that seems to miss the point, which we all seem to agree is to find
                                      better ways to deliver business value through software development.

                                      Lowell

                                      ====================
                                      Lowell Lindstrom
                                      Object Mentor, Inc | www.objectmentor.com | 1-800-338-6716
                                      lindstrom@...



                                      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/
                                    • Brad Appleton
                                      I wonder if some of this can be addressed using ideas similar to what Alistair used in Agile Software Development and his Crystal Methodologies... It seems
                                      Message 18 of 20 , May 15, 2002
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        I wonder if some of this can be addressed using ideas similar to what Alistair used in 'Agile Software Development" and his Crystal Methodologies...

                                        It seems to me that Mike has perhaps found a new "niche" or "family" of methodologies that mix XP and SCRUM together in project-specific ways based on some project-specific parameters for certain tradeoff conditions (optimizing for reuse versus for ???).

                                        I wonder where on the spectrum of Crystal methods the particular set of conditions are that lead to this 'family of methods' that has the intersection of SCRUM+XP as its basis? I think it is probably not a problem to have a separate name to identify this "space" rooted at the intersection, and having a name for specific instantiation that is optimized for certain conditions seems fine too so long as it isn't claiming to be a brand new methodology (rather, its a named variation or 'flavor' in this particular 'family' or 'subfamily' within the agile methodology space).

                                        We still need names for all these things, they just don't all have to be in the same namespace at the same level of abstraction/granularity :)

                                        On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 05:19:59PM -0500, Mike Beedle wrote:
                                        >
                                        > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                        > > > We use a different names for 2 main reasons:
                                        > > >
                                        > > > 1) out of respect for what XP and Scrum are,
                                        > > > because we don't like to say that we do is
                                        > > > XP or Scrum and then have someone pointing out
                                        > > > that XP or Scrum don't do things like we do.
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        > > I can definitely see wanting to avoid the "are you doing
                                        > > XP(Scrum)? debate." But you are doing XP and Scrum,
                                        > > plus MORE. What's interesting is the "more"
                                        > > part, that variance, not the XP and Scrum. That is
                                        > > where the attention should be. Naming the superset
                                        > > distracts from that.
                                        >
                                        > Lowell:
                                        >
                                        > I disagree. I feel it clarifies the purpose.
                                        >
                                        > The problem also is that is not only +more as you point
                                        > out above, but in many cases is:
                                        >
                                        > +more +modifying or specializing something in
                                        > Scrum or XP. For example, there are highly specialized
                                        > Scrum of Scrums in an XBreed environment, we don't
                                        > only care about Product Backlog, but about many
                                        > Backlogs with dependencies. So even when the
                                        > spirit of Scrum survives, the meeting is structured
                                        > around different buckets.
                                        >
                                        > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                        > > > 2) and because we like to remember,
                                        > > > "special combinations" that lead to a desired
                                        > > > specialized result. In the case of XP@Scrum
                                        > > > is business value, and in the case of XBreed
                                        > > > is reusability. So we abstract these special
                                        > > > combinations with a name rather than tell people:
                                        > > >
                                        > >
                                        > > Thanks! I understand a little better. Somehow I missed
                                        > > that each had a different emphasis. I was under the
                                        > > impression that they were both simply different
                                        > > combinations of XP and Scrum.
                                        >
                                        > Unfortunately, Ken and I, and the people that we associate with
                                        > are typically on the trenches, so we have had little time
                                        > to explain things better.
                                        >
                                        > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                        > > The name proliferation seems not agile to me. It introduces unnecessary
                                        > > complexity. Surely XBreed projects want business value and XP@Scrum
                                        > > projects want reuse. A better approach is to emphasize only what
                                        > > is unique, rather than the rename the whole set. What are
                                        > > the set of practices that when added to what we know as
                                        > > Scrum and XP lead to higher reuse? That is a set of practices that
                                        > > warrants a new label, not the superset. Same with XP@Scrum. What
                                        > > are the practices that when added to what we know as Scrum
                                        > > and XP deliver higher business value? Call that XP@Scrum (or BVD).
                                        > > If it is just XP, with Scrum replacing the planning game, just
                                        > > call it "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game" or "Scrum using
                                        > > XP Practices for the software development."
                                        >
                                        > Unfortunately, there are many modifications so it can't be
                                        > expressed by something as simple as:
                                        >
                                        > "XP with Scrum as the Planning Game"
                                        >
                                        > That is a starting point, and in fact, that's more or less
                                        > how XBreed started, but once the focus changed, the sentence
                                        > became a paragraph, the paragraph became a chapter, and
                                        > pretty soon you have something new.
                                        >
                                        > I suspect the same thing is going on with xp@Scrum.
                                        >
                                        > Lowell Lindstrom wrote:
                                        > > > In terms of names consider this: Monkeys and Humans have
                                        > > > a x > 99% overlap in their chromosome and gene sequences,
                                        > > > yet, this difference yields to very different animals.
                                        > > > However, as much as we are alike I don't think there
                                        > > > is any human that likes to be called a monkey
                                        > >
                                        > > Nicely phrased! Yes, I am aware that egos are involve here ;-).
                                        > > I just hope they can be kept in check enough not to
                                        > > kill the movement. A proliferation of differently names
                                        > > sets of methods that are basically identical has that
                                        > > risk associated with it.
                                        >
                                        > Well, I didn't mean to say anything related to egos.
                                        >
                                        > My point was that simple changes in the meta-architecture of
                                        > a system (genotype) can yield to big changes in the overall
                                        > structure of the instances (phenotype), and that they
                                        > may deserve a different abstraction - a different word.
                                        >
                                        > Actually, we did discuss "name proliferation" at our initial
                                        > meeting at Snowbird, and we encouraged each other to explore
                                        > and try new things without trying to "unify" things ;-)
                                        >
                                        > Diversity makes us stronger,
                                        >
                                        > - Mike
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > http://www.hipaaccelerator.com
                                        > We are hiring Java Developers, architects and project managers.
                                        > http://www.e-architects.com
                                        >
                                        > http://www.xbreed.net
                                        > http://www.agilescrum.com
                                        > http://www.livingmetaphor.org
                                        >
                                        > http://www.agilealliance.org
                                        >
                                        > http://www.mikebeedle.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                        > chicago-agile-dev-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                                        >

                                        --
                                        Brad Appleton <brad@...> http://www.bradapp.net/
                                        "Education is the ability to listen to almost anything
                                        without losing your temper or your self-confidence."
                                        -- Robert Frost
                                      • Mike Beedle
                                        ... Brad: These are interesting thoughts indeed. Much to be worked by present and future agileers, - Mike
                                        Message 19 of 20 , May 16, 2002
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Brad Appleton wrote:
                                          > I wonder if some of this can be addressed using
                                          > ideas similar to what Alistair used in
                                          > 'Agile Software Development" and his Crystal
                                          > Methodologies...
                                          >
                                          > It seems to me that Mike has perhaps found a new
                                          > "niche" or "family" of methodologies that mix
                                          > XP and SCRUM together in project-specific ways
                                          > based on some project-specific parameters
                                          > for certain tradeoff conditions (optimizing for
                                          > reuse versus for ???).
                                          > I wonder where on the spectrum of Crystal methods
                                          > the particular set of conditions are that lead to
                                          > this 'family of methods' that has the intersection
                                          > of SCRUM+XP as its basis? I think it is probably not
                                          > a problem to have a separate name to identify this
                                          > "space" rooted at the intersection, and having
                                          > a name for specific instantiation that is optimized
                                          > for certain conditions seems fine too so long as
                                          > it isn't claiming to be a brand new methodology
                                          > (rather, its a named variation or 'flavor' in
                                          > this particular 'family' or 'subfamily' within
                                          > the agile methodology space).
                                          >
                                          > We still need names for all these things, they
                                          > just don't all have to be in the same namespace
                                          > at the same level of abstraction/granularity :)

                                          Brad:

                                          These are interesting thoughts indeed.

                                          Much to be worked by present and future agileers,

                                          - Mike
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.