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

Re: [!! SPAM] RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Past "Agile" Surveys

Expand Messages
  • Dan Rawsthorne
    There is a big difference between accepting full responsibility and being sole interface. Many people have taken responsibility and are accountable for
    Message 1 of 24 , Jun 29, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      There is a big difference between "accepting full responsibility" and
      "being sole interface." Many people have taken responsibility and are
      accountable for things they actually have little knowledge of. This is
      why trust is so huge in scrum. The PO is accountable and must trust the
      team to do what "right and good"

      Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, CST
      Senior Coach, Danube Technologies
      dan@..., 425-269-8628



      Roy Morien wrote:
      >
      >
      > Well, Jens, I have always been a little sceptical about the role of a
      > PO who is the sole interface between development team and users. In
      > fact, 'm not sure that is what Scrum actually requires. Certainly it
      > is a good idea to have someone with the knowledge and responsibility
      > to be the sole ultimate user-side decision maker; Jack cannot work
      > successfully with many masters.
      >
      > But I feel that when developers take tasks to do during a sprint, this
      > comes with some user attached who has a particular interest in what
      > that deeloper is going to work on, so there must be direct contact
      > between user and developer.
      >
      > This doesn't move so far away from Scrum recommendations, if that is
      > indeed what Scrum 'requires'.
      >
      > Regards,
      > Roy Morien
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      > From: jens.meydam@...
      > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 20:43:28 +0000
      > Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Past "Agile" Surveys
      >
      >
      >
      > Hi Roy
      >
      > Scrum requires that one individual - the Product Owner - accepts full
      > responsibility for guiding development towards the best possible outcome.
      >
      > The stereotypical Product Owner is the product manager of a commercial
      > software product. The _perfect_ Product Owner is involved in the
      > design of the user experience of every single feature - clearly a
      > full-time job.
      >
      > I would expect that the 'Product Owners' of the student teams were not
      > Product Owners in this sense.
      >
      > But do they really have to?
      >
      > Perhaps it is often OK for the Product Owner to negotiate a relatively
      > vague Sprint goal and trust the developers to find the best possible
      > way to define and implement the features necessary to reach that goal.
      >
      > In this case the executive sponsor - the person who actually pays for
      > development - would have the chance to be the Product Owner. This may
      > have important advantages. However, it also means that certain
      > decisions that many would prefer to be made by the Product Owner are
      > actually made by the development team. The development team would
      > probably cooperate with expert users.
      >
      > I wonder if this is closer to the situation of the students. It is
      > certainly closer to my own situation (in-house software development,
      > the CEO being the Product Owner).
      >
      > Regards
      >
      > Jens
      >
      > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>, Roy Morien <roymorien@...>
      > wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > I take issue a bit with this idea that Scrum involves more work for
      > the client, or the PO as the client rep. The fact is, in the
      > traditional Waterfall Model, someone from the user community must
      > spend some time, often a lot of time, to create the Requirements Spec.
      > The inarguable fact is that someone must have the time to provide the
      > user-side information.
      > >
      > > I think that the Scrum approach may actually demand less time during
      > the project from the user side of things.
      > >
      > > Is this a false observation?
      > >
      > > Regards,
      > > Roy Morien
      > >
      > > To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
      > > From: jens.meydam@...
      > > Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:31:10 +0000
      > > Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: Past "Agile" Surveys
      > >
      >
      > >
      > > > > The question remains how much more successful the students
      > >
      > > > > might have been if they had been trained in Scrum and had
      > >
      > > > > used it by the book.
      > >
      > > > >
      > >
      > > > > I would expect that the practices of Scrum can make a big
      > >
      > > > > difference in certain contexts and less of a difference
      > >
      > > > > in other contexts.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > > Implicit in Scrum is the notion that someone is paying the
      > >
      > > > bills, and that the interests of this party [are] represented
      > >
      > > > by the product owner. If there is no bill payer, the
      > >
      > > > need for a formal owner declines rapidly.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Hi Peter
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > I thought Roy's summary indicated that the students had to produce
      > something useful for a kind of customer - some students (the waterfall
      > ones) even got 'fired'. That customer would be a suitable candidate
      > for the Product Owner role.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > However, unless that customer had a lot of spare time, he would have
      > to be a hands-off Product Owner - discussing goals with the developers
      > and then leaving them alone until the review.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > The students might have collaborated closely with some of the users
      > to compensate for the lack of detailed guidance by their 'Product Owner'.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > I agree that Scrum is not a good fit for open source software
      > development. The "Chief Engineer" pattern seems to be very common. On
      > the other hand, the "market" for open source software are often other
      > developers. A developer is thus well suited to fill the Product Owner
      > role.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Regards
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Jens
      > >
      > ___________________________________________________
      > > POP access for Hotmail is here! Click here to find out more
      > > http://windowslive.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=802246
      > <http://windowslive.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=802246>
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      > Make ninemsn your homepage! Get the latest news, goss and sport
      > <http://windowslive.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=813730>
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.