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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Confusion about Scrum

Expand Messages
  • Ken Schwaber
    Yes. I ve stated this requirement over and over, but it gets less attention. Ken
    Message 1 of 44 , Jan 2, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes. I've stated this requirement over and over, but it gets less attention.
      Ken

      On Jan 2, 2010, at 11:50 AM, Alex Armstrong wrote:

       

      Ken,

      In re-reading this I think you forgot to mention what, in my mind, is the most relevant point: the idea that a certifying organization cannot be the owner/creator of the knowledge on which it is certifying.  This is a requirement, and not open to subjective arguments.  If that point is clearly established, there is no argument the SA can make to retain "ownership" of the guide.  I think the three concerns you highlight below are of secondary importance, and not as influential.

      Alex


      From: kschwaber <ken.schwaber@verizon.net>
      To: scrumdevelopment@ yahoogroups. com
      Sent: Thu, December 31, 2009 10:07:06 AM
      Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Confusion about Scrum

       

      Scrum has been very successful, passing waterfall in usage during 2008. Some of that is the simplicity of Scrum. Some of that is the desire to escape waterfall. Regardless, I want to thank everyone who has learned and made the effort to use Scrum. Happy New Year, and best wishes.

      There are now two definitions of Scrum. One is maintained and sustained by Jeff Sutherland and myself at www.scrum.org. Another is an old copy that is posted at www.scrumalliance. org, by the ScrumAlliance.

      Jeff Sutherland and I posited Scrum in the early 1990's,and first published at OOPSLA'05. The most complete stand-alone definition (of Scrum, not how to use it) was in an appendix of my book, "Agile Project Management with Scrum" 2004. I published the first Scrum guide in February 2007. The first guide published by the Scrum Alliance was based on my April, 2009 Scrum Guide.

      Since that time, Jeff and I have been maintaining and sustaining the Scrum Guide, which is now housed at www.scrum.org.

      During the years, I have often seen Scrum get mixed up with techniques that can be used with it. Such techniques include lean, kanban, tqm, extreme programming, etc. That causes confusion about what is and isn't Scrum. The purpose of Jeff and myself maintaining the Scrum Guide is to retain the integrity of Scrum. Yet, there are many ways to use it and augment it. However, Scrum itself - the simple framework - is defined in our Scrum Guide.

      We have been concerned for several months about the Scrum Alliance posting an older version of the Scrum Guide. We haven't done anything about this until I saw the Chinese Scrum Guide posted, with a Scrum Alliance statement that it owned the Chinese version of the Scrum Guide. Any of you familiar with copyright law know that a derivative of the original is still owned by the original copyright holder.

      My concerns for you are several:
      1. People inadvertently looking at the ScrumAlliance post of the Scrum Guide in any language are going to be working from incorrect materials
      2. If the exam is based on the ScrumAlliance Scrum Guide, the answers are incorrect and the results are not controlled.
      3. People without the knowledge or history of Scrum and why it is organized and structured as it is starting to modify it while still calling it Scrum.

      I strongly recommend that you refer to the Scrum Guide created and sustained by the authors of Scrum, Jeff and myself.

      Happy New Year, and it is my pleasure to work with you to improve our profession.
      Ken



    • Rafael Sabbagh
      * We had a very long thread about this last December, I believe. * I unfortunately lost a lot of threads the last few months due to my Master s dissertation.
      Message 44 of 44 , Mar 29, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        > We had a very long thread about this last December, I believe.

        I unfortunately lost a lot of threads the last few months due to my Master's dissertation. I'm glad it's almost over! :)

        > One reason is that industry doesn't pay for the research, so it doesn't get done. There's a big gap between the universities and industry.

        True. We're trying to make this gap smaller here in Brazil (when it comes to Agile methodologies at least), but it's very, very hard.

        > Let's face it. Industry is cheap. They're always looking for the results of the research, but they don't want to pay for it. :-)

        Yep. But I don't think the industry is the only part interested on research results. We, as active people at the Scrum/Agile community, should be very interested on that.Well, I believe PMI puts some effort on research that justifies their beliefs, right? Maybe the ScrumAlliance and Scrum.org could do that too.



        Best,
           Rafael Sabbagh


        On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 17:59, woynam <woyna@...> wrote:
         


        We had a very long thread about this last December, I believe.

        One reason is that industry doesn't pay for the research, so it doesn't get done. There's a big gap between the universities and industry.

        Let's face it. Industry is cheap. They're always looking for the results of the research, but they don't want to pay for it. :-)

        Mark



        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Rafael Sabbagh <sabbagh@...> wrote:
        >
        > Yes, I agree. The question is: why then isn't serious research on
        > Agile/Scrum use being performed?
        >
        > Academically speaking, if I want to even justify why I am writing about
        > Agile and Scrum in my Master's dissertation, I should use any "valid"
        > research. Instead, I have to use this kind of thing, 'cause that's what
        > exists, and that's why I still need it.
        >
        >
        > Best,
        > Rafael Sabbagh
        >
        >
        >
        > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 11:19, woynam <woyna@...> wrote:
        >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Sigh. This kind of "research" drives me completely nuts. First, this does
        > > not appear to be a proper random poll. It's an online poll of "Agile"
        > > companies. It does not represent a true sample of all IT companies.
        > >
        > > What can we conclude from the numbers? Simply that 84% of companies that
        > > consider themselves agile that bothered to answer the survey have used
        > > Scrum.
        > >
        > > This is a *far* cry from concluding that 84% of all companies use Scrum.
        > >
        > > Mark
        > >
        > > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com<scrumdevelopment%40yahoogroups.com>,

        > > Hariprakash Agrawal <haricha@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > link is:
        > > http://blogs.forrester.com/tom_grant/09-04-17-extended_family_agile
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > - Hari
        > > >
        > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Rafael Sabbagh <sabbagh@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Getting back to that, did anybody have access to the actual Forrester
        > > > > Report about Agile and Scrum usage? It's now cited everywhere, but the
        > > > > actual data is nowhere on the web (not even at the Forrester website).
        > > Even
        > > > > if I'd want to buy it, I couldn't.
        > > > >
        > > > > I'm finishing my Master's dissertation and it would be great to add
        > > that
        > > > > data (and be able to refer to the report/research).
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > Best,
        > > > > Rafael Sabbagh
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > > On Fri, Jan 1, 2010 at 15:57, Bob Hartman <bob.hartman@>wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > >>
        > > > >>
        > > > >> I don't want to fan the flames any more, but a quick Google search
        > > brought
        > > > >> up a Forrester blog entry with the information about Scrum usage which
        > > Ken
        > > > >> cited. I don't want to comment on it, but I thought if people were
        > > > >> interested they could see the data themselves at http://bit.ly/8ACF3g
        > > > >>
        > > > >> - Bob -
        > > > >>
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > --
        > > > Regards,
        > > > Hariprakash Agrawal (Hari),
        > > > An Agile Coach (XP, Scrum), Certified Scrum Master, Trained Six Sigma
        > > Black
        > > > Belt, CMMi Consultant, ISO 9001:2000 Lead Auditor, MTech (Reliability &
        > > > Quality Engg) from IIT-KGP
        > > > http://opcord.com - OpCord provides trainings/consulting on many
        > > > frameworks/processes and testing services for organizations
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >


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