Re: User Stories business value and GWT
- Agreed, all work that takes resources should be captured on the backlog. technical stories lay the foundation for the ultimate value the end user derives.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Dan Rawsthorne <dan.rawsthorne@...> wrote:
> True. That's why (in my world) there are also analysis stories,
> infrastructure stories, etc... I believe in Jeff's notion that *all*
> work that is competing for priority needs to be on the Backlog - it's
> one of the main points of my CSM course. Not just work that provides
> user value, but all work that provides project value. It's a good
> discussion to have, though... how do we get such work prioritized and
> done? I use the Backlog, how do others do it? I'm sure there are many
> different strategies...
> Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, CST
> Senior Coach, Danube Technologies
> dan@..., 425-269-8628
> Ilja Preuï¿½ wrote:
> > Hi Klaus.
> > Technical user stories are an oxymoron.
> > Cheers, Ilja
- Ok, so you were either spying on my teams, or this problem is WAY to
prevalent. I've been a manager of dev teams for a fairly long time now, and
I have always hated the phrase stretch goals. I ask my teams to set
realistic goals that I can count on. I'll do everything I can to help them
meet those goals. That was one of the reasons I got on the Agile bandwagon
to begin with. As teams become more comfortable, their velocity sometimes
does creep up a little. But more importantly, as they don't feel rushed to
just fill someone's arbitrary view of how much should get done, they produce
some really high quality stuff. They also feel more comfortable
experimenting with new things, and applying the creative aspect of the job,
not just the technical.
From: "Ron Jeffries" <ronjeffries@...>
Sent: Friday, January 15, 2010 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: [!! SPAM] Re: [scrumdevelopment] Re: User Stories business
value and GWT
> Hello, Steve. On Friday, January 15, 2010, at 10:09:33 AM, you
>> Sadly, what this group heard in that message was even more
>> destructive. They were consistently putting out 35 points, almost
>> like clockwork. They were consistently signing up for 40+ points,
>> because the "powers that be" wanted to see this sense of urgency.
>> This of course ended with a huge morale problem. "We never finish
>> our sprint. We never hit our target velocity. We must suck". Then
>> I go to the executive business review to explain "well they are
>> extremely consistent with their velocity, which is supposed to be
>> the goal. They don't hit the arbitrary signed up for velocity
>> because they are being pressured to do more work, rather than
>> maintain consistency."
> That just happened to Kate Oneal's team:
> Kate Oneal: Choosing the Stories
> After a failed iteration, the team regroups with a few new
> A pertinent quote, bowdlerized for the sensitive ears here:
> Jim said, “Yes. Think how bad things would have been if we didn’t
> keep the pressure on!”
> It seemed like the entire dev team snarled. Gil jumped up. “Damn
> it, you just set us up to fail! We tell you what we can accomplish
> and then you push us to do more. If we do the job right, we fail.
> If we do the job wrong, we ship crap. Stretch goals, my
> Everyone kind of fell back. Gil looked around, then said, “Well,
> sorry. But it’s crap. We can’t win. We can’t even tie.”
> Enjoy ...
> Ron Jeffries
> It is a bad plan that admits of no modifications. -- Publius Syrus (ca. 42
> To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links