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

RE: [scrumdevelopment] Re: example of large scale development + team self organization

Expand Messages
  • Rahorn, Veronica
    What do you do, though, with enterprise-wide implementations? For example, an SAP deployment requires upstream/downstream reviews, CAB meetings, etc. for
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 10, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      What do you do, though, with enterprise-wide implementations? For example, an SAP deployment requires upstream/downstream reviews, CAB meetings, etc. for approval for movement to production. Waterfall with its natural “gates” is the best project model (and definitely not inhuman), but many teams are using agile during the design/development phases. Is this what you mean by hybrid?

       

      Thanks,

      Veronica

       

      From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com [mailto:scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim
      Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2013 12:33
      To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Re: example of large scale development + team self organization

       

       

      Amen!! Exactly my thoughts, less some I might have let slip.
      Thanks for the rebuttal.

      --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Häusler <kurt.haeusler@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > On 5 Apr 2013, at 21:36, Michael James <mj4scrum@...> wrote:
      >
      > > Lately we've been hearing a lot about prescriptive approaches to large scale development (such as "Scaled Agile Framework") that compromise Agile principles. While waterfall/agile hybrid approaches may be slightly better than what was happening before, are those compromises really necessary?
      >
      > Saying that the Scaled Agile Framework compromises Agile principles might be controversial enough to require some supporting argument.
      >
      > When I read something like waterfall/agile hybrid as being presented as a valid option my brain turns it into something like a disrespect/respect hybrid, or command & control / servant leadership hybrid, or a fear/courage hybrid.
      >
      > It comes down to values and principles, you either believe in them and work according to them, or you don't. And I think there are ways of applying agile values and principles anywhere in the process.
      >
      > Now at the very beginning and end of the process we might not be dealing with small batch sizes like stories. Sometimes we are dealing with large, project-sized batches. Perhaps when preparing an initial offer, or opening a web site to the public live once it is finished. Just because you are dealing with a larger batch size at these points in the process doesn't mean we have to abandon our agile values and principles, and switch to a command & control mindset, which is what a waterfall / agile hybrid implies. (Plus you will get a lot of waste and confusion and overhead at the border between the two conflicting cultures).
      >
      > Better to keep a good solid agile mindset, even in those parts of the process that use large batch sizes. Reject the waterfall / agile hybrids. Not that "agile" is everything, but waterfall is simply inhuman.
      >

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