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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Sprint length debate

Expand Messages
  • mj4scrum@gmail.com
    From what I ve seen, longer Sprints tend to leak more than shorter ones. --mj Sent from a phone that often corrects words I tapped to words I may not have
    Message 1 of 16 , Jan 18, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      From what I've seen, longer Sprints tend to "leak" more than shorter ones. 

      --mj

      Sent from a phone that often corrects words I tapped to words I may not have meant. 

      On Jan 13, 2012, at 5:23 AM, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:

       

      I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.

      My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?

      Bret Wortman

    • Alan Dayley
      Is the team delivering, getting done with most everything most of the time? If not, shorten the sprint to expose the problem more fully. If yes, what is the
      Message 2 of 16 , Jan 18, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        Is the team delivering, getting done with most everything most of the time?

        If not, shorten the sprint to expose the problem more fully.

        If yes, what is the reason for this discussion? Is there some pain or impediment that you think a different sprint length will help debug?

        Alan

        On Jan 13, 2012, at 6:23 AM, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:

         

        I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.

        My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?

        Bret Wortman

      • JackM
        I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3 week sprints. I
        Message 3 of 16 , Jan 19, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3 week sprints. I like 2 the best. But we do run 1 week sprints whenever there's high risk stuff going on. That way you get transparency earlier. I highly recommend not going with 4 week sprints .. it's too long to wait to see results.

          Hope this helps
          Jack
          www.agilebuddy.com

          --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:
          >
          > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
          >
          > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
          >
          >
          > Bret Wortman
          >
        • Alberto Bastos
          2 weeks is the best for us! Enviado via iPhone Em 19/01/2012, às 23:37, JackM escreveu: I am a big fan of
          Message 4 of 16 , Jan 19, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            2 weeks is the best for us! 

            Enviado via iPhone

            Em 19/01/2012, às 23:37, "JackM" <jack@...> escreveu:

             

            I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3 week sprints. I like 2 the best. But we do run 1 week sprints whenever there's high risk stuff going on. That way you get transparency earlier. I highly recommend not going with 4 week sprints .. it's too long to wait to see results.

            Hope this helps
            Jack
            www.agilebuddy.com

            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:
            >
            > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
            >
            > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
            >
            >
            > Bret Wortman
            >

          • Manish Soni
            2 weeks timeframe is best suitable for me. Regards, Manish Soni MCA, MBA, M. Phil. (Computer Science), B.Sc. (Mathematics, Physics, Computer Application)
            Message 5 of 16 , Jan 20, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              2 weeks timeframe is best suitable for me.

              Regards,
              Manish Soni
              MCA, MBA, M. Phil. (Computer Science), B.Sc. (Mathematics, Physics, Computer Application)
              PRINCE2 Practitioner, Certified Scrum Master, Microsoft Operations Framework, Certified Software Manager, Software Asset Management
              ITSM (ISO/IEC 20000), Information Security Foundation based on ISO/IEC 27002, Program & Project Support Office, Lean Six Sigma, ITIL
              MCTS (BizTalk Server 2006 Custom Applications), MCTS (Microsoft Office Project 2007)
              MCP (VB6 Distributed), MCP (Windows 2000 Server), IBM Cloud Computing Architecture, A Level, SCJP
              MCTS (.Net Framework 4 Service Communication Applications - Windows Communication Foundation Development)
              MCTS (Application Development - MOSS 2007), MCTS (SQL Server 2008 Implementation and Maintenance), CCNA
              MCPDEA, MCSD (.Net), MCDBA (SQL Server 2000), MCITP (SQL Server 2005), MCTS (Configuring - MOSS 2007)
              MCP (VB6 Desktop), OCA (9i), MCTS (Microsoft® SQL Server™ 2005 Business Intelligence Development), MCSE (2003)
              Microsoft Certified Business Management Solution Specialist In Microsoft Dynamics CRM 3.0 Applications
              Microsoft Certified Business Management Solution Specialist In Microsoft Dynamics CRM 3.0 Customization
              MCITP (Applications for Microsoft Dynamics CRM, Installation & Configuration for Microsoft Dynamics CRM)
              Microsoft Certified Business Management Solution Specialist In Microsoft Dynamics CRM 3.0 Installation and Configuration
              Microsoft Certified Business Management Solutions Specialist: Microsoft Dynamics CRM 4.0 Extending Microsoft Dynamics certification

              --- On Fri, 1/20/12, Alberto Bastos <abastos@...> wrote:

              From: Alberto Bastos <abastos@...>
              Subject: Re: {Spam} [scrumdevelopment] Re: Sprint length debate
              To: "<scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>" <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
              Cc: "scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com" <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
              Date: Friday, January 20, 2012, 7:23 AM

               
              2 weeks is the best for us! 

              Enviado via iPhone

              Em 19/01/2012, às 23:37, "JackM" <jack@...> escreveu:

               
              I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3 week sprints. I like 2 the best. But we do run 1 week sprints whenever there's high risk stuff going on. That way you get transparency earlier. I highly recommend not going with 4 week sprints .. it's too long to wait to see results.

              Hope this helps
              Jack
              www.agilebuddy.com

              --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:
              >
              > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
              >
              > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
              >
              >
              > Bret Wortman
              >

            • Abhilash
              The sprint duration depends on team and type of project. You will have to find your equilibrium. Experiment and find what suits best for you. I have teams
              Message 6 of 16 , Jan 22, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                The sprint duration depends on team and type of project. You will have to find your equilibrium. Experiment and find what suits best for you. I have teams with one & two weeks sprints.

                 Reduce the sprint duration 
                • if there is a lot of churn in the product backlog
                • team is not able to meet the commitments properly 
                • sprint burn down is not proper
                • The quality of deliverable is bad ( lots of bugs or acceptance criteria not met)
                 

                From: Alberto Bastos <abastos@...>
                To: "<scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>" <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
                Cc: "scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com" <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
                Sent: Friday, 20 January 2012 7:23 AM
                Subject: Re: {Spam} [scrumdevelopment] Re: Sprint length debate



                2 weeks is the best for us! 

                Enviado via iPhone

                Em 19/01/2012, às 23:37, "JackM" <jack@...> escreveu:

                 
                I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3 week sprints. I like 2 the best. But we do run 1 week sprints whenever there's high risk stuff going on. That way you get transparency earlier. I highly recommend not going with 4 week sprints .. it's too long to wait to see results.

                Hope this helps
                Jack
                www.agilebuddy.com

                --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:
                >
                > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
                >
                > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
                >
                >
                > Bret Wortman
                >





              • scrumnoob
                We have been doing 3 weeks sprints for the last 18 months and everyone (in and out of the team) is happy. I agree that 4 weeks feels to long, and from what I
                Message 7 of 16 , Jan 25, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  We have been doing 3 weeks sprints for the last 18 months and everyone (in and out of the team) is happy.

                  I agree that 4 weeks "feels" to long, and from what I recall, this time last year, was the least used sprint lenght. I think 2 week sprint lengths were most common.

                  Do what works, adapt if it doesnt.

                  Good luck.


                  --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "JackM" <jack@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3 week sprints. I like 2 the best. But we do run 1 week sprints whenever there's high risk stuff going on. That way you get transparency earlier. I highly recommend not going with 4 week sprints .. it's too long to wait to see results.
                  >
                  > Hope this helps
                  > Jack
                  > www.agilebuddy.com
                  >
                  > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
                  > >
                  > > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Bret Wortman
                  > >
                  >
                • Seyit Caglar Abbasoglu
                  Should we stop improvement when we re happy and there is no visible problem? Shouldn t we try other options when we have resources to do so? Perhaps everyone
                  Message 8 of 16 , Jan 25, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Should we stop improvement when we're happy and there is no 'visible' problem?
                    Shouldn't we try other options when we have resources to do so?

                    Perhaps everyone would be even more happier on 2 week sprints with shorter meetings. 
                    Or 1 week sprints with even shorter meetings. 
                    Or even perhaps daily releases.

                    18 Ocak 2012 22:06 tarihinde Michael Vizdos <mvizdos@...> yazdı:
                     

                    Hi,

                    If the team is happy (and delivering), the Product Owner is happy, and your outside stakeholders are happy... then there is no real reason to change.  If any of the "happy" things are not met above, it may be time for a retrospective to address those tough conversations. 

                    Let us know if you need assistance with any of those!

                    Otherwise -- congratulations.

                    Thank you,

                    - Mike Vizdos

                     And now all of the different the ways you can connect with me:

                      www.michaelvizdos.com
                      www.implementingscrum.com
                     @mvizdos on twitter
                     www.facebook.com/vizdosenterprises
                     A  member of www.AgileRenovation.com




                    On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:23 AM, WortmanB <bret@...> wrote:
                     

                    I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.

                    My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?

                    Bret Wortman



                  • Steve Ropa
                    I guess that would depend on what you are hoping to improve. The examples here are interesting ones, but it goes back to the same question: Is the team
                    Message 9 of 16 , Jan 25, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment

                      I guess that would depend on what you are hoping to improve.  The examples here are interesting ones, but it goes back to the same question:  Is the team asking for these changes?  If all of Mike’s questions really have been answered affirmatively, why would you want to break that for some possible or imagined improvement.  Enjoy your success.  After all, its about the software and you have happy customers. 

                       

                      From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Seyit Caglar Abbasoglu
                      Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 4:01 AM
                      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Sprint length debate

                       

                       

                      Should we stop improvement when we're happy and there is no 'visible' problem?

                      Shouldn't we try other options when we have resources to do so?

                       

                      Perhaps everyone would be even more happier on 2 week sprints with shorter meetings. 

                      Or 1 week sprints with even shorter meetings. 

                      Or even perhaps daily releases.

                       

                      18 Ocak 2012 22:06 tarihinde Michael Vizdos <mvizdos@...> yazdı:

                       

                      Hi,

                      If the team is happy (and delivering), the Product Owner is happy, and your outside stakeholders are happy... then there is no real reason to change.  If any of the "happy" things are not met above, it may be time for a retrospective to address those tough conversations. 

                      Let us know if you need assistance with any of those!

                      Otherwise -- congratulations.

                      Thank you,

                      - Mike Vizdos

                       And now all of the different the ways you can connect with me:

                        www.michaelvizdos.com
                        www.implementingscrum.com
                       @mvizdos on twitter
                       www.facebook.com/vizdosenterprises
                       A  member of www.AgileRenovation.com



                      On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:23 AM, WortmanB <bret@...> wrote:

                       

                      I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.

                      My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?

                      Bret Wortman

                       

                       

                    • tim_s_wise
                      In my experience, it depends on the team. Like Mike V. said, if they are happy and your PO is happy then great. On the other hand, depending on your
                      Message 10 of 16 , Jan 26, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        In my experience, it depends on the team. Like Mike V. said, if they are happy and your PO is happy then great.

                        On the other hand, depending on your organization and scaling the team may want to have some choices.

                        In my current organization, sprint teams are coordinated to end on the same date. In this case, I prefer to have 1, 2, or 4 (not my preference) week sprints. The reason for this is that they can all be coordinated at 4 weeks and teams can easily choose if they want to have 1, 2, or 4 week sprints individually.

                        With 3 week sprints, I feel more handcuffed to 1 and 3 week sprints.
                        In general, as teams I have been on have matured, they tend to ask for shorter sprints anyway. With the two week cycles, we can go to the one week option without many issues. Going from three to one can be difficult depending on the team, organization and PO.

                        -Tim

                        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
                        >
                        > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
                        >
                        >
                        > Bret Wortman
                        >
                      • Oksana Schwartz
                        I am currently running one week sprints for several reasons: 1. We are working on a huge project where the specs are also in progress 2. We don t have other
                        Message 11 of 16 , Feb 6, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I am currently running one week sprints for several reasons:
                          1. We are working on a huge project where the specs are also in progress
                          2. We don't have other backlog items that we can work on between receiving specs.
                          3. My team is not great at reporting feedback/storypoints/ issues so having one week sprints helps me keep updated on the progress of my team

                          Last sprint planning meeting i suggested switching back to two week sprints, and surprisingly enough I got a lot of feedback from my team saying they like the one week sprints because it forces them to check in on works in progress more often.

                          On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Abhilash <abhilash18@...> wrote:
                           

                          The sprint duration depends on team and type of project. You will have to find your equilibrium. Experiment and find what suits best for you. I have teams with one & two weeks sprints.

                           Reduce the sprint duration 
                          • if there is a lot of churn in the product backlog
                          • team is not able to meet the commitments properly 
                          • sprint burn down is not proper
                          • The quality of deliverable is bad ( lots of bugs or acceptance criteria not met)
                           

                          From: Alberto Bastos <abastos@...>Sent: Friday, 20 January 2012 7:23 AM

                          Subject: Re: {Spam} [scrumdevelopment] Re: Sprint length debate



                          2 weeks is the best for us! 

                          Enviado via iPhone

                          Em 19/01/2012, às 23:37, "JackM" <jack@...> escreveu:

                           
                          I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3 week sprints. I like 2 the best. But we do run 1 week sprints whenever there's high risk stuff going on. That way you get transparency earlier. I highly recommend not going with 4 week sprints .. it's too long to wait to see results.

                          Hope this helps
                          Jack
                          www.agilebuddy.com

                          --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3 week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
                          >
                          > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
                          >
                          >
                          > Bret Wortman
                          >






                        • JackM
                          I find it incredible actually how teams gravitate to the Scrum process. Once they get into the swing of it, they actually embrace it so I am not surprised. I
                          Message 12 of 16 , Feb 13, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            I find it incredible actually how teams gravitate to the Scrum process. Once they get into the swing of it, they actually embrace it so I am not surprised.

                            I suggest if they choose 1 week, do it.

                            Cheers
                            Jack
                            www.agilebuddy.com

                            --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Oksana Schwartz <omaeva@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > I am currently running one week sprints for several reasons:
                            > 1. We are working on a huge project where the specs are also in progress
                            > 2. We don't have other backlog items that we can work on between receiving
                            > specs.
                            > 3. My team is not great at reporting feedback/storypoints/ issues so having
                            > one week sprints helps me keep updated on the progress of my team
                            >
                            > Last sprint planning meeting i suggested switching back to two week
                            > sprints, and surprisingly enough I got a lot of feedback from my team
                            > saying they like the one week sprints because it forces them to check in on
                            > works in progress more often.
                            >
                            > On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:16 AM, Abhilash <abhilash18@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > > **
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > The sprint duration depends on team and type of project. You will have to
                            > > find your equilibrium. Experiment and find what suits best for you. I have
                            > > teams with one & two weeks sprints.
                            > >
                            > > Reduce the sprint duration
                            > >
                            > > - if there is a lot of churn in the product backlog
                            > > - team is not able to meet the commitments properly
                            > > - sprint burn down is not proper
                            > > - The quality of deliverable is bad ( lots of bugs or acceptance
                            > > criteria not met)
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > ------------------------------
                            > > *From:* Alberto Bastos <abastos@...>
                            > >
                            > > *To:* "<scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>" <
                            > > scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
                            > > *Cc:* "scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com" <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
                            > >
                            > > *Sent:* Friday, 20 January 2012 7:23 AM
                            > >
                            > > *Subject:* Re: {Spam} [scrumdevelopment] Re: Sprint length debate
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > 2 weeks is the best for us!
                            > >
                            > > Enviado via iPhone
                            > >
                            > > Em 19/01/2012, às 23:37, "JackM" <jack@...> escreveu:
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > I am a big fan of two week sprints. I wrote a blog about this once on
                            > > blog.agilebuddy.com. Never the less I have experimented with 1, 2 and 3
                            > > week sprints. I like 2 the best. But we do run 1 week sprints whenever
                            > > there's high risk stuff going on. That way you get transparency earlier. I
                            > > highly recommend not going with 4 week sprints .. it's too long to wait to
                            > > see results.
                            > >
                            > > Hope this helps
                            > > Jack
                            > > www.agilebuddy.com
                            > >
                            > > --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "WortmanB" <bret@> wrote:
                            > > >
                            > > > I'm curious as to what the community thinks about 2 weeks prints vs 3
                            > > week sprints, or sprint durations of any other length. The team I'm working
                            > > with right now has settled on 3 week sprints to minimize the overhead of
                            > > the meetings and have more development days per sprint.
                            > > >
                            > > > My own gut feeling is that they'd be better served by having more
                            > > opportunities to plan and to inspect and adapt along the way, especially as
                            > > this is a new team with relatively little scrum experience. But what does
                            > > the community think? Where does the greater value lie?
                            > > >
                            > > >
                            > > > Bret Wortman
                            > > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            > >
                            >
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.