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

Relative value of Mike Cohn CSM vs more generic CSM

Expand Messages
  • Michael Jones
    Hi all, My company is sending me on a CSM course. Mike Cohn is in town (London), end of the month, and the course is £300 more expensive than the baseline
    Message 1 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi all,

      My company is sending me on a CSM course.

      Mike Cohn is in town (London), end of the month, and the course is £300 more expensive than the baseline generic courses. I pitched to be allowed to go but the co. balked at the extra cost.

      They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer.

      I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me.

      So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer?

      Interested in opinions from people who might have attended either / both.

      Thanks,
      Michael
    • Manish Soni
      This will be agreat learning for you. Regards, Manish Soni MCA, MBA, M. Phil. (Computer Science), B.Sc. (Mathematics, Physics, Computer Application) PRINCE2
      Message 2 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        This will be agreat learning for you.

        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 Mon, 1/23/12, Michael Jones <michaelhardwinjones@...> wrote:

        From: Michael Jones <michaelhardwinjones@...>
        Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Relative value of Mike Cohn CSM vs more generic CSM
        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, January 23, 2012, 4:22 PM

         
        Hi all,

        My company is sending me on a CSM course.

        Mike Cohn is in town (London), end of the month, and the course is £300 more expensive than the baseline generic courses. I pitched to be allowed to go but the co. balked at the extra cost.

        They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer.

        I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me.

        So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer?

        Interested in opinions from people who might have attended either / both.

        Thanks,
        Michael
      • Adam Sroka
        I ve taken one of Mike s classes and I ve seen him present a couple of times. There are a lot of good Scrum instructors and he is one of them. If it were me
        Message 3 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          I've taken one of Mike's classes and I've seen him present a couple of times. There are a lot of good Scrum instructors and he is one of them. If it were me and I could afford it I would pay the difference. 

          On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Michael Jones <michaelhardwinjones@...> wrote:
           

          Hi all,

          My company is sending me on a CSM course.

          Mike Cohn is in town (London), end of the month, and the course is £300 more expensive than the baseline generic courses. I pitched to be allowed to go but the co. balked at the extra cost.

          They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer.

          I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me.

          So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer?

          Interested in opinions from people who might have attended either / both.

          Thanks,
          Michael


        • RonJeffries
          Hi Michael, ... Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum. All the CSTs have been through
          Message 4 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Michael,

            On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Michael Jones wrote:

            They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer. 

            I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me. 

            So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer? 

            Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum.

            All the CSTs have been through a rigorous selection process but it is a bit like asking whether to listen to your local bar band or pay a bit extra to hear Bonnie Raitt.

            Ron Jeffries
            I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
            will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
            I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
            Why pay now when we can pay later?

          • Bret Wortman
            I second Ron s sentiment. I was fortunate to have Jeff Sutherland co-teach my CSM class and while I don t think it cost me any extra, I would have certainly
            Message 5 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              I second Ron's sentiment. I was fortunate to have Jeff Sutherland co-teach my CSM class and while I don't think it cost me any extra, I would have certainly paid the equivalent of a couple hundred extra pounds for the privilege, and I'd put Mike Cohn into that group as well. Jeff's stories from the field, and from his years and years of Scrum experience were invaluable and highly illustrative and provided illumination into how all this would work in the real world.

              Now, how much extra would I pay to attend a Scrum course taught by Bonnie Raitt? Now there's a good question....  :-)


              Bret


              On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 6:54 AM, RonJeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
               

              Hi Michael,


              On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Michael Jones wrote:

              They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer. 

              I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me. 

              So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer? 

              Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum.

              All the CSTs have been through a rigorous selection process but it is a bit like asking whether to listen to your local bar band or pay a bit extra to hear Bonnie Raitt.

              Ron Jeffries
              I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
              will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
              I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
              Why pay now when we can pay later?


            • Michael Jones
              Hi Ron, Adam, Thanks for the replies. They were in line with my thinking. And I m going to add some Bonnie Raitt to my playlist! (hadn t heard of her) I ll see
              Message 6 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Ron, Adam,

                Thanks for the replies. They were in line with my thinking. And I'm going to add some Bonnie Raitt to my playlist! (hadn't heard of her)

                I'll see about paying the difference myself. (the company felt it would be unfair on other SMs who already received the more generic training, which to me is a slightly funny way to look at it, rather than looking at the value add for the whole team/company of SMs attending Mike's courses going forward)

                Thank you again,
                Michael


                On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM, RonJeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                 

                Hi Michael,


                On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Michael Jones wrote:

                They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer. 

                I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me. 

                So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer? 

                Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum.

                All the CSTs have been through a rigorous selection process but it is a bit like asking whether to listen to your local bar band or pay a bit extra to hear Bonnie Raitt.

                Ron Jeffries
                I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
                will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
                I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
                Why pay now when we can pay later?


              • RonJeffries
                Hi Michael, ... Yes, It is important to be fair, especially if you can also be stupid at the same time. :) Ron Jeffries www.XProgramming.com I try to Zen
                Message 7 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi Michael,

                  On Jan 23, 2012, at 7:12 AM, Michael Jones wrote:

                  I'll see about paying the difference myself. (the company felt it would be unfair on other SMs who already received the more generic training, which to me is a slightly funny way to look at it, rather than looking at the value add for the whole team/company of SMs attending Mike's courses going forward) 

                  Yes, It is important to be fair, especially if you can also be stupid at the same time. :)

                  Ron Jeffries
                  www.XProgramming.com
                  I try to Zen through it and keep my voice very mellow and low.
                  Inside I am screaming and have a machine gun.
                  Yin and Yang I figure.
                    -- Tom Jeffries

                • Ram Srinivasan
                  Message 8 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    :), am enjoying reading your email !!!!

                    On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 5:46 PM, RonJeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                     

                    Hi Michael,


                    On Jan 23, 2012, at 7:12 AM, Michael Jones wrote:

                    I'll see about paying the difference myself. (the company felt it would be unfair on other SMs who already received the more generic training, which to me is a slightly funny way to look at it, rather than looking at the value add for the whole team/company of SMs attending Mike's courses going forward) 

                    Yes, It is important to be fair, especially if you can also be stupid at the same time. :)

                    Ron Jeffries
                    www.XProgramming.com
                    I try to Zen through it and keep my voice very mellow and low.
                    Inside I am screaming and have a machine gun.
                    Yin and Yang I figure.
                      -- Tom Jeffries


                  • Mark Levison
                    An even more radical suggestion - attend Mike s course and then encourgae your peers to attend courses from other trainers. The idea being that each trainer
                    Message 9 of 19 , Jan 23, 2012
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      An even more radical suggestion - attend Mike's course and then encourgae your peers to attend courses from other trainers. The idea being that each trainer will show you somewhat different ideas. Diversity in thought and ideas will become a strength for your group.

                      Caveat - I have courses to sell, none however in the UK so I can't benefit from offering this advice.

                      Cheers
                      Mark Levison

                      On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Michael Jones <michaelhardwinjones@...> wrote:
                       

                      Hi Ron, Adam,

                      Thanks for the replies. They were in line with my thinking. And I'm going to add some Bonnie Raitt to my playlist! (hadn't heard of her)

                      I'll see about paying the difference myself. (the company felt it would be unfair on other SMs who already received the more generic training, which to me is a slightly funny way to look at it, rather than looking at the value add for the whole team/company of SMs attending Mike's courses going forward)

                      Thank you again,
                      Michael



                      On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:54 AM, RonJeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                       

                      Hi Michael,


                      On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Michael Jones wrote:

                      They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer. 

                      I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me. 

                      So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer? 

                      Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum.

                      All the CSTs have been through a rigorous selection process but it is a bit like asking whether to listen to your local bar band or pay a bit extra to hear Bonnie Raitt.

                      Ron Jeffries
                      I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
                      will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
                      I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
                      Why pay now when we can pay later?



                    • scrumnoob
                      I have only been to Mike s Course so cannot compare. However, I would def recommend it. I was totally engaged for the 2 days and he has a great style about
                      Message 10 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I have only been to Mike's Course so cannot compare.

                        However, I would def recommend it. I was totally engaged for the 2 days and he has a great style about him, very easy to listen to, always answers questions, and is generally a great guy.

                        My team attended a different session by another trainer and had different feedback, not as positive.

                        That all said, what I like may not be what you like. But the fact you have asked the question makes me think that you recognise the extra value you might feel from Mike's class, for that reason it might be best you go to his session by whatever means.


                        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, RonJeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Hi Michael,
                        >
                        > On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Michael Jones wrote:
                        >
                        > > They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer.
                        > >
                        > > I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me.
                        > >
                        > > So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer?
                        >
                        >
                        > Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum.
                        >
                        > All the CSTs have been through a rigorous selection process but it is a bit like asking whether to listen to your local bar band or pay a bit extra to hear Bonnie Raitt.
                        >
                        > Ron Jeffries
                        > www.XProgramming.com
                        > I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
                        > will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
                        > I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
                        > Why pay now when we can pay later?
                        >
                      • sharmila.patwardhan@tieto.com
                        Hi, We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over. I would like
                        Message 11 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment

                          Hi,

                           

                          We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over.

                          I would like to convince them not to plan for spillovers, what could be the points of discussions for convincing them.

                          I have few thought about not sharing so that I don’t influence others with my thoughts already.

                           

                          Regds,

                          Sharmila

                           

                        • Prashant Pund
                          Hello Sharmila, Planning with spillovers accepted as risk may mean 1. The team wants to challenge itself. 2. The team is not monitoring/respecting the
                          Message 12 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hello Sharmila,
                            "Planning with spillovers accepted as risk "may mean
                            1. The team wants to challenge itself.
                            2. The team is not monitoring/respecting the present velocity and not following the basic principle, "sustainable constant pace". Not respecting the velocity means ignoring the feedback, thereby creating a domino effect of spillovers, bringing down the business value.
                            The Scrum Master is responsible for maintaining the principles of Scrum and should intervene. Also, spillover means "not quite done" stuff as unwanted inventory. This may prove to be of lower business value in the next sprint and unnecessarily carried further.
                            Let us look at the whole issue wrt likely cost rather than Scrum and non-Scrum. 
                            -Prashant Pund
                            AgileSoft.

                             

                            On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:02 PM, <sharmila.patwardhan@...> wrote:
                             

                            Hi,

                             

                            We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over.

                            I would like to convince them not to plan for spillovers, what could be the points of discussions for convincing them.

                            I have few thought about not sharing so that I don’t influence others with my thoughts already.

                             

                            Regds,

                            Sharmila

                             




                            --
                            Warm regards,
                            Prashant Pund
                             
                            Keep it short and simple , always.

                          • Michael James
                            Regardless of which trainer, I d encourage anyone taking a Scrum class to prepare beforehand. Most trainers nowadays use exercises with learning objectives at
                            Message 13 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Regardless of which trainer, I'd encourage anyone taking a Scrum class to prepare beforehand.  Most trainers nowadays use exercises with learning objectives at multiple levels.  You'll usually get more of the benefit of the activities if you're already comfortable with the stuff you can get from books (or online): Scrum's definitions and basic rules, plus the twelve principles and four values of the Agile Manifesto.

                              I also suggest connecting with a local community (perhaps including others from the class) afterwards.  

                              --mj

                              On Jan 25, 2012, at 1:22 AM, scrumnoob wrote:

                               

                              I have only been to Mike's Course so cannot compare.

                              However, I would def recommend it. I was totally engaged for the 2 days and he has a great style about him, very easy to listen to, always answers questions, and is generally a great guy.

                              My team attended a different session by another trainer and had different feedback, not as positive.

                              That all said, what I like may not be what you like. But the fact you have asked the question makes me think that you recognise the extra value you might feel from Mike's class, for that reason it might be best you go to his session by whatever means.

                              --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, RonJeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Hi Michael,
                              >
                              > On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Michael Jones wrote:
                              >
                              > > They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer.
                              > >
                              > > I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me.
                              > >
                              > > So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer?
                              >
                              >
                              > Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum.
                              >
                              > All the CSTs have been through a rigorous selection process but it is a bit like asking whether to listen to your local bar band or pay a bit extra to hear Bonnie Raitt.
                              >
                              > Ron Jeffries
                              > www.XProgramming.com
                              > I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
                              > will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
                              > I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
                              > Why pay now when we can pay later?
                              >


                            • Wouter Lagerweij
                              Hi Sharmila, I d be most interested in what the size of the stories are. If they re large-ish: can t they be split into parts that would fit? It they re small:
                              Message 14 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Hi Sharmila,

                                I'd be most interested in what the size of the stories are. If they're large-ish: can't they be split into parts that would fit? It they're small: why is it so important that another small story is added?

                                If you have 10 small stories in your sprint, there should not be any discussion about adding one more to 'avoid slack' (Oh, and Don't Avoid Slack!)
                                If it's a discussion about two or three (or maybe four) stories in a sprint, the stories are too large...

                                Wouter

                                On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:32 AM, <sharmila.patwardhan@...> wrote:
                                 

                                Hi,

                                 

                                We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over.

                                I would like to convince them not to plan for spillovers, what could be the points of discussions for convincing them.

                                I have few thought about not sharing so that I don’t influence others with my thoughts already.

                                 

                                Regds,

                                Sharmila

                                 




                                --
                                Wouter Lagerweij         | wouter@...
                              • Andrew Burrows
                                Hi Sharmila, I d approach this a different way. Ignoring the spillover stories for a moment... Do you have an iteration of working software at the end of each
                                Message 15 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Hi Sharmila,

                                  I'd approach this a different way. Ignoring the spillover stories for a moment... Do you have an iteration of working software at the end of each sprint? When you demo it, is the software bug free and exactly what the PO asked for, or required, 100% of the time? Would you say your team completes stories thoroughly and delivers solid, working software? Does your team improve each sprint and can you point to specific improvements/added value?

                                  The reason I'm asking is that if you can answer "yes" to my questions above, and your PO is happy with the output from the team, and the team understands the risks of taking on more work than they can finish, then the problem of spillover stories probably isn't as big as it seems.

                                  If you can't answer "yes" to the questions I posed in my first paragraph, then I would suggest to the team that there's little point taking on more work until we can properly complete  the work we feel is reasonable to commit to.

                                  Thoughts?

                                  On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:32 AM, <sharmila.patwardhan@...> wrote:
                                   

                                  Hi,

                                   

                                  We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over.

                                  I would like to convince them not to plan for spillovers, what could be the points of discussions for convincing them.

                                  I have few thought about not sharing so that I don’t influence others with my thoughts already.

                                   

                                  Regds,

                                  Sharmila

                                   




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

                                • Jean Richardson
                                  This is excellent advice. It s become common knowledge, I think, that you can t learn Scrum in a two-day class. That s not a limitation of the instructor,
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment

                                    This is excellent advice.  It’s become common knowledge, I think, that you can’t learn Scrum in a two-day class.  That’s not a limitation of the instructor, it’s an effect of the complexity which is wrapped by the amazing simplicity of Scrum and the fact that doing something is not the same thing as talking about doing something.

                                     

                                    The great advantage of CSM training, from what I’ve seen, is that it’s hands-on learning (scenario-based in at least many instances) in the context of expert advising from the instructor.   A secondary advantage is that you can put some letters after your name, which in some organizational contexts, can be important.

                                     

                                    None of us who practice Scrum (I’m sure someone will pop up and contradict me) can afford to stop learning about what it means to do so.  It’s part of what makes this framework exciting to work with.   And, in contrast to early practitioners, we have a large body of knowledge (albeit of varying quality) to draw on.

                                     

                                    From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael James
                                    Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 2:24 AM
                                    To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Relative value of Mike Cohn CSM vs more generic CSM

                                     

                                     

                                    Regardless of which trainer, I'd encourage anyone taking a Scrum class to prepare beforehand.  Most trainers nowadays use exercises with learning objectives at multiple levels.  You'll usually get more of the benefit of the activities if you're already comfortable with the stuff you can get from books (or online): Scrum's definitions and basic rules, plus the twelve principles and four values of the Agile Manifesto.

                                     

                                    I also suggest connecting with a local community (perhaps including others from the class) afterwards.  

                                     

                                    --mj

                                     

                                    On Jan 25, 2012, at 1:22 AM, scrumnoob wrote:



                                     

                                    I have only been to Mike's Course so cannot compare.

                                    However, I would def recommend it. I was totally engaged for the 2 days and he has a great style about him, very easy to listen to, always answers questions, and is generally a great guy.

                                    My team attended a different session by another trainer and had different feedback, not as positive.

                                    That all said, what I like may not be what you like. But the fact you have asked the question makes me think that you recognise the extra value you might feel from Mike's class, for that reason it might be best you go to his session by whatever means.

                                    --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, RonJeffries <ronjeffries@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Hi Michael,
                                    >
                                    > On Jan 23, 2012, at 5:52 AM, Michael Jones wrote:
                                    >
                                    > > They didn't see the value add of attending a course given by a thought leader in Scrum vs a professional trainer.
                                    > >
                                    > > I'm considering paying the difference myself if the company will let me.
                                    > >
                                    > > So my question is this: do you feel there's a great deal of extra value in attending a course given by Mike (or someone of equivalent stature) vs a relatively unknown professional trainer?
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Yes. Your company should pay it, actually. He literally wrote the books on planning and user stories for Scrum.
                                    >
                                    > All the CSTs have been through a rigorous selection process but it is a bit like asking whether to listen to your local bar band or pay a bit extra to hear Bonnie Raitt.
                                    >
                                    > Ron Jeffries
                                    > www.XProgramming.com
                                    > I know we always like to say it'll be easier to do it now than it
                                    > will be to do it later. Not likely. I plan to be smarter later than
                                    > I am now, so I think it'll be just as easy later, maybe even easier.
                                    > Why pay now when we can pay later?
                                    >

                                     

                                  • srinivas chillara
                                    What would be interesting to know is, if they are consistently delivering (to the DoD) all stories but the last. If they are then, what is the point of
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                                    View Source
                                    • 0 Attachment

                                      What would be interesting to know is, if they are consistently delivering (to the DoD) all stories but the last.
                                      If they are then, what is the point of agreeing a spillover? and we can think of some poor behavioural habits being built.
                                      Isn't it a confused or possibly insidious means of introducing pressure, and an eye wash?

                                      I have an inkling that you can see the problem, and are finding it difficult to explain to teams+mgmt.
                                      Here is more ammunition:
                                      ceezone.wordpress.com/2011/11/01/commitment-under-pressure/



                                      cheers|Srinivas





                                      From: "sharmila.patwardhan@..." <sharmila.patwardhan@...>
                                      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                      Sent: Wednesday, 25 January 2012 3:02 PM
                                      Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Planned Spill overs

                                       
                                      Hi,
                                       
                                      We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over.
                                      I would like to convince them not to plan for spillovers, what could be the points of discussions for convincing them.
                                      I have few thought about not sharing so that I don’t influence others with my thoughts already.
                                       
                                      Regds,
                                      Sharmila
                                       


                                    • Steve Ropa
                                      I m not sure I understand what they are hoping to achieve by planning to not meet their commitments. I have worked with teams that did this as a way to
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                                      View Source
                                      • 0 Attachment

                                        I’m not sure I understand what they are hoping to achieve by planning to not meet their commitments.  I have worked with teams that did this as a way to hopefully “get more velocity” but honestly all it did was drain morale, and dilute the meaning of the commitment and plan.

                                         

                                        From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sharmila.patwardhan@...
                                        Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 2:33 AM
                                        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                                        Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Planned Spill overs

                                         

                                         

                                        Hi,

                                         

                                        We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over.

                                        I would like to convince them not to plan for spillovers, what could be the points of discussions for convincing them.

                                        I have few thought about not sharing so that I don’t influence others with my thoughts already.

                                         

                                        Regds,

                                        Sharmila

                                         

                                      • Alan Dayley
                                        Planning for spill over of stories is a violation of the sprint time box. Time boxes have positive effects and can have negative effects. Without a time box,
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Jan 25, 2012
                                        View Source
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Planning for "spill over" of stories is a violation of the sprint time box.  Time boxes have positive effects and can have negative effects.

                                          Without a time box, sprints can feel like a treadmill of never ending work with a brief planning pause every two weeks.

                                          If the team consistently plans for spill over they no longer have a sprint time box.  Only you can say if that is bad for this team.

                                          Alan

                                          On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 8:22 AM, Steve Ropa <theropas@...> wrote:
                                           

                                          I’m not sure I understand what they are hoping to achieve by planning to not meet their commitments.  I have worked with teams that did this as a way to hopefully “get more velocity” but honestly all it did was drain morale, and dilute the meaning of the commitment and plan.

                                           

                                          From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sharmila.patwardhan@...
                                          Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 2:33 AM
                                          To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com


                                          Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Planned Spill overs

                                           

                                           

                                          Hi,

                                           

                                          We have few projects who have been continuously planning more and also agreeing with PO about the risk of the last story being spilled over.

                                          I would like to convince them not to plan for spillovers, what could be the points of discussions for convincing them.

                                          I have few thought about not sharing so that I don’t influence others with my thoughts already.

                                           

                                          Regds,

                                          Sharmila

                                           


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