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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Sprint Planning - Sprint Length

Expand Messages
  • Michael James
    ... Really? We started with 30 days, years ago, and quickly went to 2 weeks. I agree 1 or 2 weeks is a better starting point nowadays. --mj
    Message 1 of 39 , Jun 1, 2011
      On Jun 1, 2011, at 4:36 PM, Dave Rooney wrote:

      I have yet to see a team inspect & adapt itself it's way to shorter sprints.  

      Really?  We started with 30 days, years ago, and quickly went to 2 weeks.  I agree 1 or 2 weeks is a better starting point nowadays.

      --mj

    • Andrew Burrows
      Hey Wouter, From what you re saying, it sounds like you re relying on longer sprints to hide inefficiencies in your current processes. Perhaps the team could
      Message 39 of 39 , Jun 2, 2011
        Hey Wouter,

        From what you're saying, it sounds like you're relying on longer sprints to hide inefficiencies in your current processes. Perhaps the team could inspect these and find ways to fix them?

        Andrew

        On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Wouter Lagerweij <wouter@...> wrote:
         

        This is a very useful discussion, thanks.


        Like Charles, I've been starting teams out with two week sprints. Mostly because, usually, there are plenty of difficulties for them to get any work done within those two weeks: CI and release building problems, backlog/story preparation, insufficient testing, etc. So I thought aiming for a shorter sprint would set the team up for failure, and might discourage them too much from using Scrum. I do always include a 'shorter is better' talk when choosing the sprint length with the team, but recommend two weeks.

        What you're all saying is that one week would be better, right from the start. I was wondering what the way do deal with the failure is. Or  (since the obvious answer is: fix the impediments first, go faster later) what you do to keep the team positive and engaged with adopting Scrum when their first sprints fall far short of (their) expectations?

        btw, in Dutch we have a saying: "Zachte heelmeesters maken stinkende wonden", which roughly translates as "Gentle healers make stinking wounds", meaning a direct thorough treatment of a problem is usually better, because half-measure could make the problem worse. It seems appropriate in the context.

        Wouter





        On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 12:48 AM, Ron Jeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
         

        Hello, Charles. On Wednesday, June 1, 2011, at 5:41:32 PM, you
        wrote:



        >> I believe you are missing a lot by settling for two weeks.Fair point.  I can't say my mind has changed on the matter, especially wrt to the team context for the teams I've coached, but I'll give it some consideration. 

        > Do you believe that to be true for most teams?  Is it your view
        > that most teams should do 1 week sprints?

        Yes.


        Ron Jeffries
        www.XProgramming.com
        New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled,
        the humiliating question arises, "Why then are you not taking part in
        them?" -- H. G. Wells




        --
        Wouter Lagerweij             | wouter@...



        --
        Andrew Burrows
        Managing Producer, Large Animal Games
        Call me: 212-989-4312
        Follow me: @readytoscrumble

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