Re: [teampractices] Healthy discussion: A couple of articles against scrum

[Geeta Kavathekar]

Thank you, Kevin, for taking the time to read and share your valuable
thoughts.

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Kevin Smith <ksm...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Geeta Kavathekar <
> geetakavathe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In regards to the engineering driven and "calling the shots" comments in
>> the article, as I understand the Product Owner is the sole person that owns
>> the product backlog and responsible for maximizing the value of the product
>> and the work of the Development Team. However "in the Sprint Review the
>> entire group collaborates on what to do next, so that it provides valuable
>> input input to the subsequent Sprint Planning." The basic "Scrum Value" of
>> "respect" of each person's role on the Scrum Team and what they bring needs
>> to be there.
>>
>
> ​Indeed. In agile processes, the product owner would never make decisions
> in a vacuum. In addition to evaluating customer needs and wishes, they must
> always consider the feasibility, practicality, and long-term sustainability
> from a technical side. The developers are going to provide most of that
> information. Agile was partly a reaction against "throwing requirements
> over the wall", so it emphasizes ongoing conversations between developers
> and [customers OR customer proxies such as product owners].
> ​
>
>
>> In regards to the "terminal juniority" I am not sure I understand the
>> argument as I think the best Development team is made of cross functional
>> team members which means all skill sets and levels. And that the senior
>> developers could be paired up with the junior ones as needed which could be
>> fulfilling for both and the entire team.
>>
>
> ​Absolutely!
> ​
>
>
>> The Development team from what I have heard should be at 80% capacity so
>> that there is time for exploration and creativity and 10% of the current
>> Sprint should be for "backlog grooming" so there is not a constant looking
>> ahead.
>>
>
> ​Those are not universal numbers, but are reasonable guidelines. Some
> teams might run at near full capacity while others could be below 80%. Some
> teams allocate a specific amount of time for managing/reducing tech debt.
> And some teams adjust those numbers up or down depending on external
> deadline pressures that tend to come and go. I'm not sure about Scrum, but
> in agile more generally that 10% number would be flexible as well. But your
> main point, which is that a "sprint" does not mean an emergency death
> march, is absolutely true.
> ​
>
> ​Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
>
> Kevin
> ​
>
>
> ___
> teampractices mailing list
> teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
>
>
___
teampractices mailing list
teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices

Re: [teampractices] Healthy discussion: A couple of articles against scrum

[Geeta Kavathekar]

Thanks for sharing these articles. They were most interesting to me.  As a
newly certified PSM and just having studied The Scrum Guide and now working
a Scrum team I found these articles really very enlightening. I would agree
with all of the comments Kevin talked about as I read the articles I had
many of the same thoughts. Please bear with my basic thoughts below and
these articles shed light on what hiccups I can run into or what more I
could do as a Scrum Master.

As I understand (please note that I am still learning) that Scrum is based
on the empiricism which means that knowledge comes from experience and
making decisions based on what is known. Three pillars (transparency,
inspection and adaptation) uphold every implementation.  So in the first
article, it was interesting to read about the "one sided transparency"
since every Scrum event is based on those 3 pillars including transparency.
Scrum is about long term goals and short term planning. In the Sprint
review is where the Product owner should make it visible about the long
term goal and the assessment on the progress toward completing projected
work by the desired time for the goal.

I was surprised to read that the author felt that their creativity is
stifled if they have to explain themselves while working as from what I
understand Scrum's team model "is designed to optimize flexibility,
creativity and productivity."  The reason behind the daily standup is a
short meeting related to the 3 pillars and inspecting and adapting and
making it transparent to the development team on how things are going
rather than waiting to the last minute or a weekly status meeting.  In my
understanding the development  team is responsible or committed for the
estimates of the user story and the "how" of implementing them. To be self
managed including having those "expertise or specialized" skills in the
development team to create the product increment. I would think that is how
teams are motivated and want to work or be is to have their autonomy,
mastery and purpose. In Scrum by being cross functional and self organizing
it should enable them to that end.

In regards to the engineering driven and "calling the shots" comments in
the article, as I understand the Product Owner is the sole person that owns
the product backlog and responsible for maximizing the value of the product
and the work of the Development Team. However "in the Sprint Review the
entire group collaborates on what to do next, so that it provides valuable
input input to the subsequent Sprint Planning." The basic "Scrum Value" of
"respect" of each person's role on the Scrum Team and what they bring needs
to be there. In an engineering driven organization just because the
engineer/developer called the shots does it mean they brought the most
value to the customer/marketplace or did something they thought was cool?
Again this also does not mean that there is no room for discussion which
takes "courage" and "openness" among the Scrum team members.

In regards to the "terminal juniority" I am not sure I understand the
argument as I think the best Development team is made of cross functional
team members which means all skill sets and levels. And that the senior
developers could be paired up with the junior ones as needed which could be
fulfilling for both and the entire team.

In regards to the comments about the sprint being an "emergency" or running
as fast as you can and "weeding out low performers" makes me feel like the
Scrum Master did not teach or coach on the Scrum Framework.  The
Development team from what I have heard should be at 80% capacity so that
there is time for exploration and creativity and 10% of the current Sprint
should be for "backlog grooming" so there is not a constant looking ahead.
The statements at the end that "Agile" glorifies "emergency" and an
"aspiring demogague (scrum master)" is not how I view Scrum or my role as
Scrum Master. In fact as a servant leader and in an utopian (naive) world I
would work myself out of the job/role.

If you've read this far, thank you for your time and attention.  Your
comments are welcome as I learn.

Regards,
Geeta




On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Kevin Smith  wrote:

> Again, thanks Joaquin for sharing these.
>
>
> This (insanely long) email is in response to article:
>
> https://michaelochurch.wordpress.com/2015/06/06/why-
> agile-and-especially-scrum-are-terrible/
>
>
> Here's my tl;dr of the article: He associates agile with aggressive
> management, hyper-focus on individual productivity, stifling developer
> creativity, poor code quality, and a lack of professional development.
>
> Here's my tl;dr of my response: Agile encourages humane management,
> de-emphasizes individual performance, enhances developer creativity,
> can/should improve code quality, and is neutral to positive regarding
> professional development.
>
> And with that, I invite you to marvel at my massive wall o' text
>
>
> 

Re: [teampractices] [FYI] Planning offsites

[Geeta Kavathekar]

I just wanted to share my experience from also organizing and facilitating
global team meetings generally held in Asia. For the generation of ideas we
used the "World Cafe" method. It was good especially to give team members
that may not feel so comfortable speaking due fluency and/or personality a
chance to voice their ideas.

http://www.theworldcafe.com/key-concepts-resources/world-cafe-method/

For the "getting agreement" when we were in a smaller group trying
consolidate and prioritize we used a rubber ball to different team members
and when they had the ball it was their chance to speak. It was the
person's (who had the ball) decision on who to throw the ball to next and
again allowed people to speak and no one person to monopolize the
conversation. It also made it fun and lively!

We also used the Covey Important and Urgent Matrix to prioritize and then
finally I had 2-3 buckets and people voted by placing a paper with the
items they thought were the priorities.


On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 3:24 PM, Kevin Smith  wrote:

> My understanding is that the main other initiative is coming from Finance,
> and is focused on spending donor money wisely for group travel (including
> but not limited to offsites). It includes travel, admin, and c-levels. They
> seem to be in kind of a planning and fact-finding phase right now.
>
>
>
> Kevin Smith
> Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Joel Aufrecht 
> wrote:
>
>> Is there documentation or tracking tasks or home pages for the other
>> initiatives?  What are they focusing on?
>>
>>
>>
>> *-- Joel Aufrecht*
>> Team Practices Group
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 3:33 PM, Kevin Smith 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I have posted a draft page[1] which will evolve into a checklist and
>>> linky portal, to help guide how to plan and run an offsite. It is a very
>>> early work in progress, but I hope to flesh it out substantially over the
>>> next week or two. At that point, I'll declare the related phab task[2]
>>> done. If you feel motivated to contribute, feel free to add to the
>>> checklist, or comment on the talk page.
>>>
>>> As a side note, there are other initiatives in the foundation also aimed
>>> at documenting or improving the processes for offsites. This (TPG) part
>>> will focus mostly on the content and outcomes.
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Team_Practices_Group/Planning
>>> _offsites
>>> [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T138777
>>>
>>> Kevin Smith
>>> Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> teampractices mailing list
>>> teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> teampractices mailing list
>> teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
>>
>>
>
> ___
> teampractices mailing list
> teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
>
>
___
teampractices mailing list
teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices