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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Flaccid Scrum ...

Expand Messages
  • Stephen Palmer
    Absolutely! Agile processes, Scrum or otherwise, make it harder to hide poor quality people and teams behind process compliance. Steve
    Message 1 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Absolutely! Agile processes, Scrum or otherwise, make it harder to hide
      poor quality people and teams behind process compliance.

      Steve

      Nancy Dirgo wrote:
      > Tim,
      >
      > I totally agree. If you don't have he team and discipline as well as
      > the motivation, SCRUM won't get you there. I've been doing software
      > development now for 25 years and have used many different processes.
      > The people make the difference.
      >
      > Nancy
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > *From:* Tim Walker <walketim@...>
      > *To:* scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      > *Sent:* Friday, January 30, 2009 6:38:04 AM
      > *Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Flaccid Scrum ...
      >
      > Scrum is not enough. Attention to technical excellence and hiring
      > motivated people are required for it to be successful. It's no silver
      > bullet and absence adherence to the values and principles we might,
      > indeed, be better off with a different process.
      >
      > Tim
      >
      > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Kane Mar <kane_sfo@yahoo. com
      > <mailto:kane_sfo%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
      > > Martin Fowler has written a thought provoking article on, what he calls,
      > > FlaccidScrum. In a
      > > nutshell he's seeing projects that have adopted Scrum, make quick
      > progress
      > > and then "After a
      > > while progress is slow because the code base is a mess. What's
      > happened is
      > > that they haven't
      > > paid enough attention to the internal quality of their software."
      > >
      > > In defense of Scrum Martin also points out, "prominent Scrummers they've
      > > always
      > > emphasized that you must have good technical practices."
      > >
      > > I personally think that he makes a good point, and his article is a
      > timely
      > > reminder that good
      > > engineering practices (Continuous Integration, TDD and Refactoring)
      > are all
      > > very important.
      > >
      > > Anyway, here's the article: http://martinfowler .com/bliki/
      > FlaccidScrum. html <http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlaccidScrum.html>
      > >
      > > Best regards,
      > > Kane Mar
      > > http://KaneMar. com <http://KaneMar.com> | http://www.linkedin
      > .com/in/kanemar <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar>
      > > http://www.twitter. com/Kane_ Mar <http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar>
      > | http://www.twitter. com/AgileCarniva l
      > <http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival>
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
    • Brad Appleton
      Doesnt Scrum also prescribe (or at least REALLY STRONGLY recommend) at least daily integration and test-automation? I could swear I remember reading that in
      Message 2 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Doesnt Scrum also prescribe (or at least REALLY STRONGLY recommend) at
        least daily integration and test-automation? I could swear I remember
        reading that in the first Scrum book from Schwaber and Beedle?

        I'm curious as to how often this problem is encountered even in the face
        of daily/nightly builds and test-automation (but not necessarily
        "continuous" integration, and no TDD, despite the string test-automation).

        What Ive seen is that even with the above (but no refactoring and TDD),
        the problem can still very easily happen. The recent book "Emergent
        Design" suggests that the discipline of Emergent Design (which includes
        both TDD and Refactoring) is the bare minimum in technical practices
        that are needed in conjunction with Scrum (no mention of pairing, tho it
        is often easiest to teach and grow refactoring expertise thru pairing).

        --
        Brad Appleton <brad {AT} bradapp.net>
        Agile CM Environments (http://blog.bradapp.net/)
        & Software CM Patterns (www.scmpatterns.com)
        "And miles to go before I sleep" -- Robert Frost
      • Amanda Abelove
        Sigh... I just figure it is easier to start a badass user group with some awesome tricks than try to do a million things with a user forum. Since this stuff is
        Message 3 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Sigh... I just figure it is easier to start a badass user group with some awesome tricks than try to do a million things with a user forum. Since this stuff is part of my job, I want it to be cooler and easier to get by the brass.

          Watch this space around the beginning of March: http://scrumclub.org

          On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Stephen Palmer <stephen.palmer@...> wrote:


          Absolutely! Agile processes, Scrum or otherwise, make it harder to hide
          poor quality people and teams behind process compliance.

          Steve

          Nancy Dirgo wrote:
          > Tim,
          >
          > I totally agree. If you don't have he team and discipline as well as
          > the motivation, SCRUM won't get you there. I've been doing software
          > development now for 25 years and have used many different processes.
          > The people make the difference.
          >
          > Nancy
          >
          > ----------------------------------------------------------
          > *From:* Tim Walker <walketim@...>
          > *To:* scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
          > *Sent:* Friday, January 30, 2009 6:38:04 AM
          > *Subject:* Re: [scrumdevelopment] Flaccid Scrum ...
          >
          > Scrum is not enough. Attention to technical excellence and hiring
          > motivated people are required for it to be successful. It's no silver
          > bullet and absence adherence to the values and principles we might,
          > indeed, be better off with a different process.
          >
          > Tim
          >
          > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Kane Mar <kane_sfo@yahoo. com
          > <mailto:kane_sfo%40yahoo.com>> wrote:
          > > Martin Fowler has written a thought provoking article on, what he calls,
          > > FlaccidScrum. In a
          > > nutshell he's seeing projects that have adopted Scrum, make quick
          > progress
          > > and then "After a
          > > while progress is slow because the code base is a mess. What's
          > happened is
          > > that they haven't
          > > paid enough attention to the internal quality of their software."
          > >
          > > In defense of Scrum Martin also points out, "prominent Scrummers they've
          > > always
          > > emphasized that you must have good technical practices."


          > >
          > > I personally think that he makes a good point, and his article is a
          > timely
          > > reminder that good
          > > engineering practices (Continuous Integration, TDD and Refactoring)
          > are all
          > > very important.
          > >
          > > Anyway, here's the article: http://martinfowler .com/bliki/
          > FlaccidScrum. html <http://martinfowler.com/bliki/FlaccidScrum.html>
          > >
          > > Best regards,
          > > Kane Mar
          > > http://KaneMar. com <http://KaneMar.com> | http://www.linkedin
          > .com/in/kanemar <http://www.linkedin.com/in/kanemar>
          > > http://www.twitter. com/Kane_ Mar <http://www.twitter.com/Kane_Mar>
          > | http://www.twitter. com/AgileCarniva l
          > <http://www.twitter.com/AgileCarnival>
          > >
          > >
          >
          >


        • Brad Appleton
          ... I m struggling with trying to get some folks thru this as well. Despite drawing upon my wonderful list of quotes on simplicity at
          Message 4 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Stephen Bobick wrote:
            > I've seen this "flaccid Scrum" before as well, and usually the culprit
            > is (mis)use of the KISS principle and an aversion to the principal of
            > agressive and regular refactoring.

            I'm struggling with trying to get some folks thru this as well. Despite
            drawing upon my wonderful list of "quotes" on simplicity at
            http://blog.bradapp.net/2006/05/simple-aint-easy-myths-and.html

            I still run into the misinterpretation of "Simple" as being easy to do
            today/now rather than being simple to change/evolve over the long hall
            (i.e. minimizing TOTAL work (today + tomorrow) rather than minimizing
            CURRENT efforts.)

            Maarten Volder's does a good job of describing the misconception at
            http://www.maartenvolders.com/blog/2008/09/simplicity-and-why-it-matters.html

            --
            Brad Appleton <brad {AT} bradapp.net>
            Agile CM Environments (http://blog.bradapp.net/)
            & Software CM Patterns (www.scmpatterns.com)
            "And miles to go before I sleep" -- Robert Frost
          • Mitch Lacey
            Hello Adam, Sorry to chime in a little late, but the topic of fixing defects into a Sprint is a bit of a perplexing one. I ve wrestled with this and have a
            Message 5 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
            • 0 Attachment

              Hello Adam,

               

              Sorry to chime in a little late, but the topic of fixing defects into a Sprint is a bit of a perplexing one.

               

              I’ve wrestled with this and have a chapter on it for my upcoming book.

               

              One of the rules we have on the list is no spamming of blog posts or URL’s to drive traffic to our websites, but I talked to Ken about it and he’s OK with me sharing.

               

              You can check out the draft chapter here:

              http://tinyurl.com/chghy5

               

              Please provide feedback on the chapter, it’s fresh off the press.

               

              Mitch

               

              From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Adam Sroka
              Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 3:26 PM
              To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: ScrumButt [was [Bad] Scrum ...]

               

              On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Joseph Little <jhlittle@...> wrote:

              > Hi Kane,
              >
              > I would certainly agree. And thanks for raising the issue. And
              > apologies if I deflate the interest of some readers by changing the
              > subject line to a different metaphor.
              >

              Hehe. You said "deflate".

              > I think it is a feature (not a bug) that Scrum does not *require
              > specific* engineering practices. But not continuously improving
              > Engineering practices is a form of ScrumButt ("we do Scrum, but...we
              > don't have any engineering practices"). Doing Scrum absolutely means
              > that you must improve engineering practices. Continuously!!!
              >
              > You and Martin (apparently) don't define what "a mess" means.
              I'll
              > suggest two things to start with that might clean it up:
              > (1) A story is not done until all bugs are fixed (very soon this
              > almost always means you must have more automated testing).
              > (2) Somewhere in every story we must do some refactoring of the code.
              > Should be part of the definition of done. That DoD is *very* important.
              >

              Yes, but, having been there myself:

              1) We can't possibly fix all of the existing (production) bugs in a
              single iteration. Would it be okay if we increased the length of our
              iterations? Add an "iteration 0" so that we can assess the impact to
              existing production code of every new effort?

              2) I don't know what is going to break if I refactor this stuff,
              because there are no tests. Can we create "technical stories" so that
              we can go on refactoring crusades? Can we greatly inflate our
              estimates, because we don't know what is going to break?

              And, I'll add another "but" to the pile:

              What do we do if some parts of the team are willing to adopt
              "engineering practices" and others resist? In my experience (And I'm
              an "XP guy") "engineering practices" only work team wide. If most of
              the team are doing TDD, continuous integration, pairing, etc, and one
              or two guys are sneaking in untested code, velocity will grind to a
              standstill while the "good guys" attempt to clean up after the bad.

              > One more thing, somewhat different to what Martin was getting at:
              > * we must also have continuous improvement in Business Value Engineering.
              >
              > If we can't provide evidence that we are getting better and better at
              > delivering BV, then what are we doing? Of course, many specific
              > practices in this. More in another post.
              >

              What is the "business value" of cleaning up the huge mess of horrible
              legacy code we've created over the past umpteen years? Does business
              understand the value of adding tests? Does business understand the
              value of eliminating bugs that don't have an immediate (known) impact
              on the customer? Adding testing and refactoring to every story will
              greatly reduce velocity (at least initially.) Will the business accept
              this?

            • Anthony Principato
              Hello, My company is in the process of figuring out how we can better leverage Scrum techniques, disciplines and principles within our Data Center and
              Message 6 of 30 , Feb 2, 2009
              • 0 Attachment

                Hello,

                 

                My company is in the process of figuring out how we can better leverage Scrum techniques, disciplines and principles within our Data Center and Infrastructure groups to better support Scrum/Agile Development teams. Can anyone please share their experiences, approaches with aligning the planning of Data Center and Infrastructure new and updated build outs of all environments up and through Disaster Recovery in preparation of Sprint Development efforts.  

                What we are trying to do is align accordingly the timing of Infrastructure and Data Center build outs in direct relation with Development Sprint efforts so we can be better prepared for Sprint Development.

                 

                Questions we are asking ourselves:  

                 

                Do we time-box work effort processes by server type, number of servers so we can strive for velocity levels to communicate back to the business and development for release planning?

                Do we create a Scrum Service Level Model so we can maintain a plug and play of Virtual Machine resources for all project release initiatives?

                 

                Any help would be appreciative.

                 

                Tony

                  

                  

                 

                -----Original Message-----
                From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mitch Lacey
                Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 4:05 PM
                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: ScrumButt [was [Bad] Scrum ...]

                 

                Hello Adam,

                 

                Sorry to chime in a little late, but the topic of fixing defects into a Sprint is a bit of a perplexing one.

                 

                I’ve wrestled with this and have a chapter on it for my upcoming book.

                 

                One of the rules we have on the list is no spamming of blog posts or URL’s to drive traffic to our websites, but I talked to Ken about it and he’s OK with me sharing.

                 

                You can check out the draft chapter here:

                http://tinyurl. com/chghy5

                 

                Please provide feedback on the chapter, it’s fresh off the press.

                 

                Mitch

                 

                From: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com [mailto:scrumdevelo pment@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf Of Adam Sroka
                Sent: Friday, January 30, 2009 3:26 PM
                To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
                Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: ScrumButt [was [Bad] Scrum ...]

                 

                On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Joseph Little <jhlittle@mindspring .com> wrote:

                > Hi Kane,
                >
                > I would certainly agree. And thanks for raising the issue. And
                > apologies if I deflate the interest of some readers by changing the
                > subject line to a different metaphor.
                >

                Hehe. You said "deflate".

                > I think it is a feature (not a bug) that Scrum does not *require
                > specific* engineering practices. But not continuously improving
                > Engineering practices is a form of ScrumButt ("we do Scrum, but...we
                > don't have any engineering practices"). Doing Scrum absolutely means
                > that you must improve engineering practices. Continuously! !!
                >
                > You and Martin (apparently) don't define what "a mess" means.
                I'll
                > suggest two things to start with that might clean it up:
                > (1) A story is not done until all bugs are fixed (very soon this
                > almost always means you must have more automated testing).
                > (2) Somewhere in every story we must do some refactoring of the code.
                > Should be part of the definition of done. That DoD is *very* important.
                >

                Yes, but, having been there myself:

                1) We can't possibly fix all of the existing (production) bugs in a
                single iteration. Would it be okay if we increased the length of our
                iterations? Add an "iteration 0" so that we can assess the impact to
                existing production code of every new effort?

                2) I don't know what is going to break if I refactor this stuff,
                because there are no tests. Can we create "technical stories" so that
                we can go on refactoring crusades? Can we greatly inflate our
                estimates, because we don't know what is going to break?

                And, I'll add another "but" to the pile:

                What do we do if some parts of the team are willing to adopt
                "engineering practices" and others resist? In my experience (And I'm
                an "XP guy") "engineering practices" only work team wide. If most of
                the team are doing TDD, continuous integration, pairing, etc, and one
                or two guys are sneaking in untested code, velocity will grind to a
                standstill while the "good guys" attempt to clean up after the bad.

                > One more thing, somewhat different to what Martin was getting at:
                > * we must also have continuous improvement in Business Value Engineering.
                >
                > If we can't provide evidence that we are getting better and better at
                > delivering BV, then what are we doing? Of course, many specific
                > practices in this. More in another post.
                >

                What is the "business value" of cleaning up the huge mess of horrible
                legacy code we've created over the past umpteen years? Does business
                understand the value of adding tests? Does business understand the
                value of eliminating bugs that don't have an immediate (known) impact
                on the customer? Adding testing and refactoring to every story will
                greatly reduce velocity (at least initially.) Will the business accept
                this?

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