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

Re: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM

Expand Messages
  • Gary Feldman
    ... I m not quite sure what you mean by process requirements instead of just asking whether Scrum and SW-CMM can be reconciled. The answer to that is that
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 7, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      David Laffineuse wrote:
      > Mike,
      >
      > Thank you for the reference, much appreciated. Another question for
      > you, is it possible to reconcile approaches such as Scrum with process
      > requirements based on SW-CMM?

      I'm not quite sure what you mean by "process requirements" instead of just asking whether Scrum and SW-CMM can be reconciled. The answer to that is that it's not a matter of reconciliation (which implies that a conflict has been acknowledged). The better question is whether Scrum can be used to achieve SW-CMM certification, to which the answer is yes. This is on the FAQ at http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/faq.htm , item 12. For more discussion see the section on CMM in the musings paper recently posted by Ken Schwaber at http://www.controlchaos.com/download/Scrum%20Musings.pdf (page 21).

      There is another perspective, illustrated at the same site by http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/debate.htm and http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/ap.htm , that classifies CMM as a defined process, and hence in contrast to the empirical process approach with Scrum. My take on this, however, is that CMM is really about an effective, __documented__ process. An underlying goal of CMM is for the customer (i. e., the DoD which funded the SEI's CMM work) to be able to assess their suppliers' abilities. It's easy to read into this the idea of planning a project several years out, and measuring how well a team meets that plan. But that's not what the KPAs demand. What they're really after is knowing that the development team is being run very well, can be trusted to deliver on their commitments, and can continue to improve, keeping up with the state of the art. Scrum certainly delivers on that.

      Gary
    • Mike Cohn
      I can t get to the web right now but there should be an article by Mark Paulk on the Agile Alliance website at www.agilealliance.com
      Message 2 of 9 , Jan 7, 2005
      • 0 Attachment

        I can’t get to the web right now but there should be an article by Mark Paulk on the Agile Alliance website at www.agilealliance.com that compares Scrum to CMM level 3. My experience is that Scrum teams can quite easily achieve level 3. Scrum alone doesn’t get you there because it doesn’t include things like configuration management which are needed. But, I’ve never met a Scrum team that didn’t have some sort of CM process in place, even though it’s not mandated by Scrum.

         

        --Mike Cohn

        Author of User Stories Applied for Agile Software Development

        www.mountaingoatsoftware.com

        www.userstories.com


        From: David Laffineuse [mailto:dlaffineuse@...]
        Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2005 9:46 PM
        To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM

         

        Mike,

        Thank you for the reference, much appreciated.  Another question for you, is it possible to reconcile approaches such as Scrum with process requirements based on SW-CMM?

        David.

        >From: "Mike Cohn" <mike@...>

        >Reply-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com

        >To: <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>

        >Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM

        >Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 21:10:19 -0700

        >MIME-Version: 1.0

        >X-Sender: mike@...

        >Received: from n21a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com ([66.94.237.50]) by mc9-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 20:10:43 -0800

        >Received: from [66.218.69.4] by n21.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Jan 2005 04:10:40 -0000

        >Received: from [66.218.67.192] by mailer4.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 06 Jan 2005 04:10:40 -0000

        >Received: (qmail 10803 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2005 04:10:39 -0000

        >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.218)  by m10.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 6 Jan 2005 04:10:39 -0000

        >Received: from unknown (HELO pyramid-01.kattare.com) (69.59.195.20)  by mta3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 6 Jan 2005 04:10:38 -0000

        >Received: from GROWL (uslec-66-255-155-18.cust.uslec.net [66.255.155.18])(authenticated bits=0)by pyramid-01.kattare.com (8.12.10/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j064ALJJ004623for <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>; Wed, 5 Jan 2005 20:10:34 -0800

        >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jFpVCvYfKMg5FF1QPEJ+pZh

        >X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email

        >X-Apparently-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com

        >X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353

        >Thread-Index: AcTzfIsx2KPpT2C3S2CN/O7hMuqxVgAJqMhQ

        >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180

        >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 69.59.195.20

        >X-Yahoo-Profile: mikewcohn

        >Mailing-List: list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com; contact scrumdevelopment-owner@yahoogroups.com

        >Delivered-To: mailing list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com

        >Precedence: bulk

        >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>

        >Return-Path: sentto-1569064-5866-1104984640-dlaffineuse=hotmail.com@...

        >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2005 04:10:43.0406 (UTC) FILETIME=[B0C4D6E0:01C4F3A5]

        >

        >Hi David-

        >

        >Critical Chain thinking has very much influenced how I plan Scrum projects.

        >If you look at http://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/agileplanning/ you'll see

        >my book in progress on "Agile Estimating and Planning."  Chapter 13

        >("Improving Accuracy with Buffers") is explicitly about incorporating

        >Critical Chain-style buffers into Scrum projects.

        >

        >

        >

        >Also, see David Anderson's book, "Agile Management for Software Engineering"

        >for a great deal on TOC and agile in general.

        >

        >

        >

        >--Mike Cohn

        >

        >Author of User Stories Applied for Agile Software Development

        >

        >www.mountaingoatsoftware.com

        >

        >www.userstories.com

        >

        >   _____

        >

        >From: David Laffineuse [mailto:dlaffineuse@...]

        >Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 4:10 PM

        >To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com

        >Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM

        >

        >

        >

        >Does anyone have experience using Scrum and Critical Chain Project

        >Management in combination?

        >

        >Much interested in your experiences if you have.

        >

        >

        >

        >David Laffineuse

        >

        >dlaffineuse@...

        >

        >

        >

        >



        Send email straight to your blog. Upload jokes, thoughts and even photos. Click here to find out how!

        To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
        To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...



      • David Laffineuse
        Gary, Thanks for the feedback. I now see that my original question was not properly stated. Indeed my concern is not if Agile methodologies like Scrum can
        Message 3 of 9 , Jan 7, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Gary,

          Thanks for the feedback. I now see that my original question was not
          properly stated. Indeed my concern is not if Agile methodologies like Scrum
          can support efforts towards a successful SW-CMM appraisal but if it's indeed
          possible to fit Scrum in an organization that has already achieved a certain
          level of SW-CMM compliance based on 'fixed' processes. As you can imagine,
          those fixed processes were developed at great expense, teams have been
          trained, and those processes are now supposedly 'institutionalized'. The
          same processes are closely enforced via standards compliance audits and any
          deviations require well justified waivers.

          The little I have read (and understood) about Scrum so far leads me to
          believe that implementing Scrum in such an environment would indeed not be
          possible without some major changes in policies and standards. The Scrum
          planning process alone would be a hard pill to swallow in our current
          environment. We indeed believe in a heavy and detailed planning phase
          (detailed software development plans, negotiations and agreements with
          suppliers, defined architectures, baselined system/software requirement
          specifications, etc.) leading to the team commiting to a project end date
          (often more than 6 months down the road). The planning phase itself often
          takes weeks if not months. I understand that the Scrum product backlog and
          subsequent sprint backlog development is much shorter and less detailed. I
          also imagine that the detailed Gantt charts (sometimes hundreds/thousands of
          tasks) we are used to are no longer used. Last but not least it also seems
          to me that the team commitment is more on delivering the scope of a sprint
          within 30 days than it is on delivering the complete project scope (i.e.
          several sprints) by a specific end date (something that our management would
          not easily accept). So I do indeed see a conflict between such approaches
          to SW-CMM compliance and the practices preached by Scrum, hence my question
          as to whether a reconciliation is possible or not. Any thoughts?

          David.




          >From: Gary Feldman <g1list_1a@...>
          >Reply-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
          >To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
          >Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM
          >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:23:05 -0500
          >MIME-Version: 1.0
          >X-Sender: g1list_1a@...
          >Received: from n8a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com ([66.94.237.42]) by
          >mc9-f14.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Fri, 7 Jan 2005
          >07:23:30 -0800
          >Received: from [66.218.69.5] by n8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan
          >2005 15:23:17 -0000
          >Received: from [66.218.66.27] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07
          >Jan 2005 15:23:17 -0000
          >Received: (qmail 23705 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
          >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP;
          >7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
          >Received: from unknown (HELO mout.perfora.net) (217.160.230.41) by
          >mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
          >Received: from h00a0c5564f63.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.31.229.141]
          >(helo=[127.0.0.1])by mrelay.perfora.net with ESMTP (Nemesis),id
          >0MKyxe-1CmvxI3ncO-0003IQ; Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:23:12 -0500
          >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jHWTx8cm/H3l7gHv5WTqdhS
          >X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email
          >X-Apparently-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
          >User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
          >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
          >References: <BAY15-F28591ECF37CE20E858D4E9A7940@...>
          >X-Provags-ID: perfora.net abuse@...
          >login:56e9e8e9f7097b2be775897a4ddcc192
          >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 217.160.230.41
          >X-Yahoo-Profile: gfyho
          >Mailing-List: list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com; contact
          >scrumdevelopment-owner@yahoogroups.com
          >Delivered-To: mailing list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
          >Precedence: bulk
          >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
          >Return-Path:
          >sentto-1569064-5888-1105111397-dlaffineuse=hotmail.com@...
          >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2005 15:23:30.0781 (UTC)
          >FILETIME=[D80330D0:01C4F4CC]
          >
          >David Laffineuse wrote:
          > > Mike,
          > >
          > > Thank you for the reference, much appreciated. Another question for
          > > you, is it possible to reconcile approaches such as Scrum with process
          > > requirements based on SW-CMM?
          >
          >I'm not quite sure what you mean by "process requirements" instead of just
          >asking whether Scrum and SW-CMM can be reconciled. The answer to that is
          >that it's not a matter of reconciliation (which implies that a conflict has
          >been acknowledged). The better question is whether Scrum can be used to
          >achieve SW-CMM certification, to which the answer is yes. This is on the
          >FAQ at http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/faq.htm , item 12. For more
          >discussion see the section on CMM in the musings paper recently posted by
          >Ken Schwaber at http://www.controlchaos.com/download/Scrum%20Musings.pdf
          >(page 21).
          >
          >There is another perspective, illustrated at the same site by
          >http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/debate.htm and
          >http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/ap.htm , that classifies CMM as a
          >defined process, and hence in contrast to the empirical process approach
          >with Scrum. My take on this, however, is that CMM is really about an
          >effective, __documented__ process. An underlying goal of CMM is for the
          >customer (i. e., the DoD which funded the SEI's CMM work) to be able to
          >assess their suppliers' abilities. It's easy to read into this the idea of
          >planning a project several years out, and measuring how well a team meets
          >that plan. But that's not what the KPAs demand. What they're really after
          >is knowing that the development team is being run very well, can be trusted
          >to deliver on their commitments, and can continue to improve, keeping up
          >with the state of the art. Scrum certainly delivers on that.
          >
          >Gary
          >

          _________________________________________________________________
          Don�t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
          http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
        • Steven Gordon
          If SW-CMM is working correctly, there is a process for improving the process, so the process should not be institutionally fixed . If the SW process is
          Message 4 of 9 , Jan 7, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            If SW-CMM is working correctly, there is a process for improving the
            process, so the process should not be institutionally "fixed". If the SW
            process is working well, then there would be no need for Scrum.

            On the other hand, if the SW process is not working well, then I would
            wonder:
            1. How they passed certification in the first place?
            2. Why the failure of the incremental improvement process to achieve
            good results would not justify the more radical improvement process of:
            - trying Scrum on one project, and
            - if that achieved good results, switching other projects to Scrum one
            by one and measuring improvement.

            -----Original Message-----
            From: David Laffineuse [mailto:dlaffineuse@...]
            Sent: Fri 1/7/2005 10:12 PM
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Cc:
            Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM




            Gary,

            Thanks for the feedback. I now see that my original question was not
            properly stated. Indeed my concern is not if Agile methodologies like Scrum
            can support efforts towards a successful SW-CMM appraisal but if it's indeed
            possible to fit Scrum in an organization that has already achieved a certain
            level of SW-CMM compliance based on 'fixed' processes. As you can imagine,
            those fixed processes were developed at great expense, teams have been
            trained, and those processes are now supposedly 'institutionalized'. The
            same processes are closely enforced via standards compliance audits and any
            deviations require well justified waivers.

            The little I have read (and understood) about Scrum so far leads me to
            believe that implementing Scrum in such an environment would indeed not be
            possible without some major changes in policies and standards. The Scrum
            planning process alone would be a hard pill to swallow in our current
            environment. We indeed believe in a heavy and detailed planning phase
            (detailed software development plans, negotiations and agreements with
            suppliers, defined architectures, baselined system/software requirement
            specifications, etc.) leading to the team commiting to a project end date
            (often more than 6 months down the road). The planning phase itself often
            takes weeks if not months. I understand that the Scrum product backlog and
            subsequent sprint backlog development is much shorter and less detailed. I
            also imagine that the detailed Gantt charts (sometimes hundreds/thousands of
            tasks) we are used to are no longer used. Last but not least it also seems
            to me that the team commitment is more on delivering the scope of a sprint
            within 30 days than it is on delivering the complete project scope (i.e.
            several sprints) by a specific end date (something that our management would
            not easily accept). So I do indeed see a conflict between such approaches
            to SW-CMM compliance and the practices preached by Scrum, hence my question
            as to whether a reconciliation is possible or not. Any thoughts?

            David.




            >From: Gary Feldman <g1list_1a@...>
            >Reply-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            >To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            >Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM
            >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:23:05 -0500
            >MIME-Version: 1.0
            >X-Sender: g1list_1a@...
            >Received: from n8a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com ([66.94.237.42]) by
            >mc9-f14.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Fri, 7 Jan 2005
            >07:23:30 -0800
            >Received: from [66.218.69.5] by n8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan
            >2005 15:23:17 -0000
            >Received: from [66.218.66.27] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07
            >Jan 2005 15:23:17 -0000
            >Received: (qmail 23705 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
            >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP;
            >7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
            >Received: from unknown (HELO mout.perfora.net) (217.160.230.41) by
            >mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
            >Received: from h00a0c5564f63.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.31.229.141]
            >(helo=[127.0.0.1])by mrelay.perfora.net with ESMTP (Nemesis),id
            >0MKyxe-1CmvxI3ncO-0003IQ; Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:23:12 -0500
            >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jHWTx8cm/H3l7gHv5WTqdhS
            >X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email
            >X-Apparently-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            >User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
            >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
            >References: <BAY15-F28591ECF37CE20E858D4E9A7940@...>
            >X-Provags-ID: perfora.net abuse@...
            >login:56e9e8e9f7097b2be775897a4ddcc192
            >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 217.160.230.41
            >X-Yahoo-Profile: gfyho
            >Mailing-List: list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com; contact
            >scrumdevelopment-owner@yahoogroups.com
            >Delivered-To: mailing list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            >Precedence: bulk
            >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
            >Return-Path:
            >sentto-1569064-5888-1105111397-dlaffineuse=hotmail.com@...
            >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2005 15:23:30.0781 (UTC)
            >FILETIME=[D80330D0:01C4F4CC]
            >
            >David Laffineuse wrote:
            > > Mike,
            > >
            > > Thank you for the reference, much appreciated. Another question for
            > > you, is it possible to reconcile approaches such as Scrum with process
            > > requirements based on SW-CMM?
            >
            >I'm not quite sure what you mean by "process requirements" instead of just
            >asking whether Scrum and SW-CMM can be reconciled. The answer to that is
            >that it's not a matter of reconciliation (which implies that a conflict has
            >been acknowledged). The better question is whether Scrum can be used to
            >achieve SW-CMM certification, to which the answer is yes. This is on the
            >FAQ at http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/faq.htm , item 12. For more
            >discussion see the section on CMM in the musings paper recently posted by
            >Ken Schwaber at http://www.controlchaos.com/download/Scrum%20Musings.pdf
            >(page 21).
            >
            >There is another perspective, illustrated at the same site by
            >http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/debate.htm and
            >http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/ap.htm , that classifies CMM as a
            >defined process, and hence in contrast to the empirical process approach
            >with Scrum. My take on this, however, is that CMM is really about an
            >effective, __documented__ process. An underlying goal of CMM is for the
            >customer (i. e., the DoD which funded the SEI's CMM work) to be able to
            >assess their suppliers' abilities. It's easy to read into this the idea of
            >planning a project several years out, and measuring how well a team meets
            >that plan. But that's not what the KPAs demand. What they're really after
            >is knowing that the development team is being run very well, can be trusted
            >to deliver on their commitments, and can continue to improve, keeping up
            >with the state of the art. Scrum certainly delivers on that.
            >
            >Gary
            >

            _________________________________________________________________
            Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
            http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/



            To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
            Yahoo! Groups Links
          • David Laffineuse
            Steven, See comments below ... [We indeed have a process of continuous improvement via organizational change control boards (the same process is shared by
            Message 5 of 9 , Jan 8, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Steven,

              See comments below

              >From: Steven Gordon <sagordon@...>
              >Reply-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              >To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              >Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM
              >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 23:19:53 -0700
              >
              >If SW-CMM is working correctly, there is a process for improving the
              >process, so the process should not be institutionally "fixed". If the SW
              >process is working well, then there would be no need for Scrum.
              >
              [We indeed have a process of continuous improvement via organizational
              change control boards (the same process is shared by multiple development
              centers). I guess that I was using the term 'fixed' more in contrast with
              'agile' in this case. They are indeed not fixed, in the sense that they are
              always improved upon. These processes work well, specifically for our
              larger development projects (many months, sometimes years of development).
              However the product managers and senior management team often feel that the
              processes are too heavy for smaller projects that need quick build cycles
              and customer feedback, i.e. the processes do not scale down very well
              despite our efforts to tailor them. Hence the idea of of possibly applying
              Scrum to those smaller projects.]
              >
              >
              >On the other hand, if the SW process is not working well, then I would
              >wonder:
              >1. How they passed certification in the first place?
              >2. Why the failure of the incremental improvement process to achieve
              >good results would not justify the more radical improvement process of:
              > - trying Scrum on one project, and
              > - if that achieved good results, switching other projects to Scrum one
              > by one and measuring improvement.
              >
              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: David Laffineuse [mailto:dlaffineuse@...]
              > Sent: Fri 1/7/2005 10:12 PM
              > To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              > Cc:
              > Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Gary,
              >
              > Thanks for the feedback. I now see that my original question was not
              > properly stated. Indeed my concern is not if Agile methodologies like
              >Scrum
              > can support efforts towards a successful SW-CMM appraisal but if it's
              >indeed
              > possible to fit Scrum in an organization that has already achieved a
              >certain
              > level of SW-CMM compliance based on 'fixed' processes. As you can
              >imagine,
              > those fixed processes were developed at great expense, teams have been
              > trained, and those processes are now supposedly 'institutionalized'. The
              > same processes are closely enforced via standards compliance audits and
              >any
              > deviations require well justified waivers.
              >
              > The little I have read (and understood) about Scrum so far leads me to
              > believe that implementing Scrum in such an environment would indeed not be
              > possible without some major changes in policies and standards. The Scrum
              > planning process alone would be a hard pill to swallow in our current
              > environment. We indeed believe in a heavy and detailed planning phase
              > (detailed software development plans, negotiations and agreements with
              > suppliers, defined architectures, baselined system/software requirement
              > specifications, etc.) leading to the team commiting to a project end date
              > (often more than 6 months down the road). The planning phase itself often
              > takes weeks if not months. I understand that the Scrum product backlog
              >and
              > subsequent sprint backlog development is much shorter and less detailed.
              >I
              > also imagine that the detailed Gantt charts (sometimes hundreds/thousands
              >of
              > tasks) we are used to are no longer used. Last but not least it also
              >seems
              > to me that the team commitment is more on delivering the scope of a sprint
              > within 30 days than it is on delivering the complete project scope (i.e.
              > several sprints) by a specific end date (something that our management
              >would
              > not easily accept). So I do indeed see a conflict between such approaches
              > to SW-CMM compliance and the practices preached by Scrum, hence my
              >question
              > as to whether a reconciliation is possible or not. Any thoughts?
              >
              > David.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > >From: Gary Feldman <g1list_1a@...>
              > >Reply-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              > >To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              > >Subject: Re: [scrumdevelopment] Scrum and CCPM
              > >Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:23:05 -0500
              > >MIME-Version: 1.0
              > >X-Sender: g1list_1a@...
              > >Received: from n8a.bulk.scd.yahoo.com ([66.94.237.42]) by
              > >mc9-f14.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Fri, 7 Jan
              >2005
              > >07:23:30 -0800
              > >Received: from [66.218.69.5] by n8.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 Jan
              > >2005 15:23:17 -0000
              > >Received: from [66.218.66.27] by mailer5.bulk.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
              >07
              > >Jan 2005 15:23:17 -0000
              > >Received: (qmail 23705 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
              > >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m21.grp.scd.yahoo.com with
              >QMQP;
              > >7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
              > >Received: from unknown (HELO mout.perfora.net) (217.160.230.41) by
              > >mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 Jan 2005 15:23:13 -0000
              > >Received: from h00a0c5564f63.ne.client2.attbi.com[66.31.229.141]
              > >(helo=[127.0.0.1])by mrelay.perfora.net with ESMTP (Nemesis),id
              > >0MKyxe-1CmvxI3ncO-0003IQ; Fri, 07 Jan 2005 10:23:12 -0500
              > >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jHWTx8cm/H3l7gHv5WTqdhS
              > >X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: groups-email
              > >X-Apparently-To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              > >User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206)
              > >X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
              > >References: <BAY15-F28591ECF37CE20E858D4E9A7940@...>
              > >X-Provags-ID: perfora.net abuse@...
              > >login:56e9e8e9f7097b2be775897a4ddcc192
              > >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 217.160.230.41
              > >X-Yahoo-Profile: gfyho
              > >Mailing-List: list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com; contact
              > >scrumdevelopment-owner@yahoogroups.com
              > >Delivered-To: mailing list scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
              > >Precedence: bulk
              > >List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com>
              > >Return-Path:
              > >sentto-1569064-5888-1105111397-dlaffineuse=hotmail.com@...
              > >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2005 15:23:30.0781 (UTC)
              > >FILETIME=[D80330D0:01C4F4CC]
              > >
              > >David Laffineuse wrote:
              > > > Mike,
              > > >
              > > > Thank you for the reference, much appreciated. Another question for
              > > > you, is it possible to reconcile approaches such as Scrum with process
              > > > requirements based on SW-CMM?
              > >
              > >I'm not quite sure what you mean by "process requirements" instead of
              >just
              > >asking whether Scrum and SW-CMM can be reconciled. The answer to that is
              > >that it's not a matter of reconciliation (which implies that a conflict
              >has
              > >been acknowledged). The better question is whether Scrum can be used to
              > >achieve SW-CMM certification, to which the answer is yes. This is on the
              > >FAQ at http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/faq.htm , item 12. For more
              > >discussion see the section on CMM in the musings paper recently posted by
              > >Ken Schwaber at http://www.controlchaos.com/download/Scrum%20Musings.pdf
              > >(page 21).
              > >
              > >There is another perspective, illustrated at the same site by
              > >http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/debate.htm and
              > >http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/ap.htm , that classifies CMM as a
              > >defined process, and hence in contrast to the empirical process approach
              > >with Scrum. My take on this, however, is that CMM is really about an
              > >effective, __documented__ process. An underlying goal of CMM is for the
              > >customer (i. e., the DoD which funded the SEI's CMM work) to be able to
              > >assess their suppliers' abilities. It's easy to read into this the idea
              >of
              > >planning a project several years out, and measuring how well a team meets
              > >that plan. But that's not what the KPAs demand. What they're really
              >after
              > >is knowing that the development team is being run very well, can be
              >trusted
              > >to deliver on their commitments, and can continue to improve, keeping up
              > >with the state of the art. Scrum certainly delivers on that.
              > >
              > >Gary
              > >
              >
              > _________________________________________________________________
              > Don���t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
              > http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
              >
              >
              >
              > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
              > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
              >scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              ><< winmail.dat >>

              _________________________________________________________________
              Don�t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
              http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.