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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] History of Scrum

Expand Messages
  • Dan Rawsthorne
    Well, of course it s my interpretation of the evolution, Bas, I wrote it, didn t I? It even says it s what I ve seen in the blog itself. I would be
    Message 1 of 19 , Oct 4, 2009
      Well, of course it's my interpretation of the evolution, Bas, I wrote
      it, didn't I? It even says it's what "I've seen" in the blog itself. I
      would be interested in what you've seen, too. Could you publish it for
      us somewhere?

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



      Bas Vodde wrote:
      > Dan,
      >
      > I read your blog post and didn't agree with it all.
      >
      > Would it be better to calk them *your* evolutions :P
      > (Or Scrum-type-Dan, as it seem very different from others)
      >
      > Bas
      >
      > On Oct 4, 2009, at 4:27 PM, Dan Rawsthorne wrote:
      >
      >
      >> I wrote a very quick "Evolution of Scrum" blog here:
      >> http://blogs.danube.com/evolution-of-scrum
      >>
      >> It's certainly not official nor well-researched - it's just my
      >> observations, as best I remember them.
      >>
      >> But, it's a start. I'd like to see a good 5-page description, too.
      >>
      >> Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, CST
      >> Senior Coach, Danube Technologies
      >> dan@..., 425-269-8628
      >>
      >> peterstev wrote:
      >>
      >>> Hi everyone,
      >>>
      >>> Just out of curiosity, I read Ken's original Scrum paper from the
      >>> OOPSLA <http://jeffsutherland.com/oopsla/schwapub.pdf>.
      >>>
      >>> Scrum has changed a lot since that paper. Ken envisioned an
      >>>
      >> iterative,
      >>
      >>> incremental process with 4 phases: Planning, Architecture,
      >>>
      >> Development
      >>
      >>> (Sprints), and Closure. Looks kind of like modern RUP, but many
      >>> principles of modern Scrum are recognizable:
      >>>
      >>> * empirical process control. This is essential because the
      >>> underlying process cannot be accurately modeled.
      >>> * iterative development with the whole team (test, dev, etc)
      >>> * direct interaction with the customer.
      >>>
      >>> Conspicuously missing were the concepts of Scrum Master and
      >>> retrospective.
      >>>
      >>> Obviously Scrum emerged from the context of the time: a seemingly
      >>> small evolutionary change which led to the development of a
      >>>
      >> radically
      >>
      >>> different "species" of project management.
      >>>
      >>> Has anyone traced the evolution of Scrum? How did it evolve into its
      >>> present state? Where did the Scrum Master come from, or
      >>>
      >> retrospective,
      >>
      >>> and why? Why have the pre-game and post-game phases withered away?
      >>>
      >>> With the future so foggy, I am wondering where we came from and
      >>>
      >> how we
      >>
      >>> got here.
      >>>
      >>> Cheers,
      >>>
      >>> Peter
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Adam Sroka
      Hi Dan: I like what you wrote, but it does feel more like a personal evolution (Your personal practice? Your personal understanding?) than an accurate history
      Message 2 of 19 , Oct 4, 2009
        Hi Dan:

        I like what you wrote, but it does feel more like a personal evolution
        (Your personal practice? Your personal understanding?) than an
        accurate history of Scrum. Based on my own observations, what you
        describe as "Scrum I" is what most people are still doing and is
        closest to what the "Scrum Guide" describes. Your "Scrum II" is
        similar to what some Scrum teams do and what most XP teams do.

        Your "Scrum III" sounds like a partial implementation of Kanban (If
        you fully implemented Kanban you could throw away the timebox
        altogether.) I don't know of many Scrum teams that began implementing
        Kanban in 2007. Most of the ones I know are starting to look at it
        now, or it might still not be on their radar screen. In either case I
        think calling Kanban part of the definition of Scrum is way premature.

        On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Dan Rawsthorne
        <dan.rawsthorne@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > I wrote a very quick "Evolution of Scrum" blog here:
        > http://blogs.danube.com/evolution-of-scrum
        >
        > It's certainly not official nor well-researched - it's just my
        > observations, as best I remember them.
        >
        > But, it's a start. I'd like to see a good 5-page description, too.
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.