Re: Technical Tasks in the Product Backlog
- Hi Charles,
I must admit I've got an admiration for Moa Tse-tung. The long march and ridding China of foriegn occupation, both very impressive. He lost his way though in his later years. The cultural revolution stands out as a particular low point.
Thanks for the reference. It won't surprise you that as someone who still programs myself, that I totally agree with Mike Beedle. Telling people to do incremental and iterative software development, without telling them how to stave off the dreaded exponential cost of change curve, is tantamount to setting them up to fail IMHO.
Interestingly you buy Ken's argument. Do you mind sharing why?
--- In email@example.com, Chuck B <chuck-lists2@...> wrote:
> In the archives of this list. Do advanced search for schwaber in author field.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 30, 2011, at 8:38 AM, "Matthew" <matt.heusser@...> wrote:
> > I can't help but notice that Ron's approach sounds a whole lot more in line with the Agile Manifesto. Neither Ken nor Jeff claim to have invented Scrum; I believe the term first appeared in the Harvard Business Review article "the new new product development game."
> > Charles, could you provide a link to Ken's original words, in their entirely, in the context of the original discussion?
> > --
> > Matthew Heusser,
> > Personal Blog: http://xndev.blogspot.com/
> > Test Community Blog: http://softwaretestpro.com/blog/
> > Twitter: mheusser
> > ------------------------------------
> > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
> > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
- Hello, Kathleen. On Friday, July 1, 2011, at 9:47:13 AM, you
> In some posts, there seems to be a focus on doing things 'by theYes, I do agree. And at the same time one does need to start
> book', rather than exploring the possibilities of other concepts
> or techniques that might be useful. It implies that the method is
> the 'one true way' of doing things, and that you don't need to
> learn anything else to be successful. Unfortunately, reality is
> way too messy for that to be true.
> To get really good at something, you need to go beyond mastery of
> a given method (or words of a specific master). You need to learn
> the underlying theory and principles (like what was mentioned
> before), then integrate the ideas and processes in new ways to
> deal with your current situation.
/somewhere/, inside the "safe region" for learning before you die.
Scrum purports to define part of the safe region.
> Creating new concepts should be encouraged. We should all beAgile got started based on the combined experience of a large number
> challenging the status quo and pushing for better ways to do
> things. Isn't that how agile got started? Why stop now?
of people who had observed a large number of teams for a large
number of years. It is possible that those people knew rather a lot.
It is also possible that teams starting out to do this stuff are not
yet qualified to make decisions about what to do and what not to do.
Show me the features!