Re: story template abuse (was Re: [scrumdevelopment] Letting attacks go unchallenged)
- You know, I thought it was a great tool when I first ran across it. It’s a nice way to grasp some of the basics around what a story can be. I would still consider it a helpful tool. I even like the idea of teams estimating stories using the Fibonacci numbers and planning poker. Having the architects assign those estimates seems a little off though. What about the rest of the team?My feeling, and I think you both hit it on the head with INVEST, is that these are all meant to be helpful ways to get to a more agile work environment. Mechanical implementations that get in the way of the agile mindset are what I feel is the biggest challenge we are going to face in the coming years.SteveYes the whole as I, then I , so I is really irritating.I feel a kid being made to write "I must not do X" a 1000 times in a chalkboard. A like the invest advice much better...
On Feb 1, 2010, at 2:22 PM, Michael James <michael@danube. com> wrote:
On Feb 1, 2010, at 10:18 AM, Steve Ropa wrote:
> For instance, I have seen some of the most amusing stories twisted around only so that they can fit the "As a ___, I can ___ so that___" model. Would it really have ended life as we know it if the story did not meet that form? And yes, I've even seen people insist on rejecting stories that don't follow the form....
That's great, since user stories aren't even part of Scrum. I remember sitting in on a planning meeting where every PBI was actually a task, but started with "As a company, we want ____." They'd missed the whole point, and had no idea about INVEST (Independent Negotiable Valuable Estimable Small, and Testable) stories.
Another company had their architects assign estimates to all the PBIs using Fibonacci numbers.
Let's call these situations "mechanical implementations. " The whole point of Scrum is that it does not prescribe many "how" practices. Teams have to think for themselves.
Doesn't it seem a bit disproportionate, though? It does to me. I too
am curious what aspect of the human condition causes us to attribute
so much power to these words. The word "fuck" for example - though it
has an accepted definition in common use its meaning is entirely
contextual. It doesn't even convey a useful concept, therefore. So,
why is its presence in speech (or writing) so important to us?_,_.___
Why does a "wardrobe malfunction" produce a massive emotional response including congressional investigations? Beats me. Probably has something to do with the Puritans and maybe that repression amplifies the response.
Having said that, I do live in a less prudish part of the world (more sex on TV, more tolerance for public nudism, less sensitivity to obscene language). Even here, scatological references don't have much place in public discourse - you might occasionally hear 'Scheisse' from a politician's mouth, but it's an exception.
An interesting question is why modesty developed, why it lives on, and whether it will survive the Internet. It seems pretty deeply rooted, but I think that question belongs on a different list...
-- Peter Stevens, CSM, CSPO, CSP www.scrum-breakfast.com tel: +41 44 586 6450