Hi Bill: Thanks for the response. I've run into this situation regularly when introducing people to the Planning Game. I appreciate your explanations and have a few further questions.
> From: William Wake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: December 28, 2004 9:20 AM > > Well, in the case at hand, the customer proxy was bundling things that > would be better left unbundled. ("I won't release unless I get all > this stuff: they're all equally important.") How/When were you able to determine that the "things" would be better left unbundled? I've heard the "it's all important" statement numerous times. I usually see a small light go on when I ask pointed questions about why they choose to wait for X iterations (X being the number of iterations required to deliver all things that are equally important) before beginning to realize a return on their investment. Sometimes I do not. This seems to be more apparent in product-based development, i.e. say Microsoft releasing a new version of Office - they don't actually release until it's "complete" (settle down with the tomatoes, I'm just using an arbitrary example :) How would you explain the benefits of unbundling to the Customer in that context? > > If I may, when I first read the article, I drew my own conclusion that > > the prioritization process may be an exercise in bundling, unbundling, > > and re-bundling -- a careful dance between customer and development > > team. My colleague, while agreeing that there might be connections > > across the topics, he stopped me from prematurely connecting the dots. > > I might say that the "planning" process is an exercise in bundling > etc., and prioritization is part of that. And I agree that the "dance" > is often there (but sometimes there's no dance as one side can't see > the value). > > I have on occasion heard (from both the customer side and the > development side) that they don't see the value in breaking something > up. But the ability to unbundle can unlock extra value and reduce > risk. How would you try to explain the value, if indeed it is there? > > Which brings me to the second point... > > > > How does the choice to bundle or not relate to prioritization? The > > conclusions seem after-the-fact (i.e. post prioritization) rather than > > re-focusing on the prioritization problem. > > I'd say there's two ends to it. One is just the question of what you > decide goes together in, say, a release. This may be a loose bundling > (though sometimes it's more coupled than that). > > Another issue is that the stories are not a given. Reworking a story > by unbundling its pieces can let you prioritize the whole thing > differently. (This splitting can happen during the planning > conversation.) > > Consider two stories A and B versus their "split" versions A1, A2, A3, > and B1, B2, B3. If you work with big chunks, you have one decision: "A > then B" or "B then A"? If you work with finer pieces, you have a bunch > of alternatives; A1/A2/A3/B1/B2/B3 and B1/B2/B3/A1/A2/A3 are only two > of the possibilities. If you unbundle, you may decide B3+A2 is the > most valuable piece, deliver it first, and start booking revenue > sooner. That was indeed the "careful dance" that I was suggesting, if, as you pointed out, both sides play nicely together. :) But further, what warning signs do others see when things were: a) not unbundled when they should have been, b) bundled incorrectly, and c) unbundled too much? ... if such scenarios have manifested themselves for you. Below are some signs that I have recognized: a) - stories aren't being completed within the iteration - stories are being split frequently - during implementation, deep dependencies are uncovered that weren't previously obvious b) - stories are being split frequently - pairs are working a story in completely different directions and rarely find a need to collaborate regularly I have some overlap, but it's a quick retrospective of some recent projects. I've tried using the various "rules of thumb" for story/task sizes, but find that some would still like to have more women working on that baby, so-to-speak, than spending mental cycles on unbundling and, if needed, rebundling. > And I hope my reply was as clear as Virginia's bright blue sky today. > And thanks for reading! Definitely. I feel that we're on the same wave length (please advise if you feel otherwise ;). Now I'm curious about diving in further. Thanks again for the reply. Tom To Post a message, send it to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extremeprogramming/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
