Re: The Definition of Done
Cockburn's metaphor is what I meant by walking skeleton http://alistair.cockburn.us/Walking+Skeleton
I found that my teams find this analogy easier to understand and
remember, it's just something with this term that just sticks in everybody's mind.
Tracer bullets and Cohn's definitions for estimations are also good stuff. Guess that all go by the same venue.
--- In email@example.com, Markus Gaertner <shino@...> wrote:
> can you please elaborate your understanding of walking skeleton a bit.
> Personally I got an association from Cockburns Agile Software Development book
> in mind related to the term, but I think you mean something different.
> Personally I liked the definitions for estimations from Mike Cohn in Agile
> Estimating and Planning very, very well defined - and insightful.
> Kind regards
> Markus GÃ¤rtner
> Juan Banda wrote:
> > Markus,
> > Thanks for you comments. I have to admit that I also have had bad
> > experiences with hours to burn as a metric, it simply doesn't reflect
> > accomplishments.
> > What I'm using now is a mix of story points and estimated hours, not sure
> > how it'll go but what I can tell you from sure is that no matter how many
> > hours your team burn, what it really matters is the 'done' functionality
> > that is completed (walking skeleton principle).
> > Regards,
> > Juan http://juanbandaonscrum.blogspot.com/
> > --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Markus Gaertner <shino@> wrote:
> >> Hi Juan,
> >> nice write-up. What you made pretty clear is the fact that silo-thinking
> >> (as Elisabeth Hendrickson coined it) or sub-optimizing on a "This is my
> >> DoD", "This is your DoD" level does not lead to success. You have to put
> >> the Done on a larger level for this. Your first considerations are truly
> >> facing this thinking of people transitioning from waterfall approaches to
> >> software development.
> >> However, I disagree with the working hour metric that I see in your Sprint
> >> level write-up. Thinking of work as hours to burn down is a bad thing to
> >> consider. In the end the feature counts, not the working hours spent on
> >> it. This is why story points should be used over pure working hours,
> >> avoiding Student syndrome and Parkinsons law. But maybe I put too much
> >> interpretation about my bad experiences with hour based estimation into
> >> your write-up there.
> >> What I liked about your definition is the discussion about certain levels.
> >> Clearly, I know that my definition of Done works for me, since I can work
> >> on the rather abstract level there. On the other hand I also know that
> >> others are searching for a more detailed definition in order to understand
> >> it. See Myers-Briggs for more details on this.
> >> Kind regards Markus GÃÂ¤rtner
> >> Juan Banda wrote:
> >>> Very interesting discussion. I wrote an entry on my blog time ago that
> >>> goes by the same venue:
> >>> http://juanbandaonscrum.blogspot.com/2009/08/definition-of-done-and-quest-for.html
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Juan