Discussion:
Stop Prefetching Stories
Michael Wollin yahoo@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 16:30:07 UTC
Permalink
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?

Michael

------------------------------------

------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
Alan Dayley alandd@dayleyagile.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 17:04:05 UTC
Permalink
This is one of the better discussions of this topic:
http://java.dzone.com/articles/stop-writing-code-you-cant-yet-test

Alan
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they
can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway.
I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate,
speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem
is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some
eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
Michael Vizdos mvizdos@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 17:08:09 UTC
Permalink
Hi.

You don't really need any arguments.

If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you are
addressing that.

Cool.

The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No heroics.

The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get
done in a Sprint.

Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular
basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the team
to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of each
sprint.

This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.

#deliver

Thank you.

Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact

plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises
twitter.com/mvizdos
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they
can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway.
I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate,
speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem
is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some
eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
Michael Wollin yahoo@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 18:11:17 UTC
Permalink
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here after tomorrow.

On Jul 24, 2014, at 1:08 PM, "Michael Vizdos ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <***@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Hi.

You don't really need any arguments.

If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you are addressing that.

Cool.

The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No heroics.

The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get done in a Sprint.

Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the team to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of each sprint.

This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.

#deliver

Thank you.

Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact

plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises
twitter.com/mvizdos
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 18:19:10 UTC
Permalink
You’ve done what you can. Remind them, maybe. Then go drinking.
R
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here after tomorrow.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm not bad, I'm just drawn that way. -- Jessica Rabbit
Michael Wollin yahoo@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 18:37:57 UTC
Permalink
At least I get paid.

On Jul 24, 2014, at 2:19 PM, "Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <***@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

You’ve done what you can. Remind them, maybe. Then go drinking.

R
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here after tomorrow.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
I'm not bad, I'm just drawn that way. -- Jessica Rabbit
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 18:43:38 UTC
Permalink
Mike,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
At least I get paid.
Yeah, though if you’re like me you hate working just for the pay … and you can always try one more time. Odds are not with you, though.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Don't ignore your dreams; don't work too much; say what you think; cultivate friendships; be happy. -- Paul Graham
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 18:50:02 UTC
Permalink
Getting paid is important. I've tried not getting paid, getting paid less
than I deserve, and getting paid based on the performance of people who
won't listen to me. None of those were great. However, I have also been
paid reasonably well to do things I hated, and that wasn't much better.

Change your organization or change your organization, as they say.
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Mike,
At least I get paid.
Yeah, though if you’re like me you hate working just for the pay 
 and you
can always try one more time. Odds are not with you, though.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Don't ignore your dreams; don't work too much; say what you think;
cultivate friendships; be happy. -- Paul Graham
George Dinwiddie lists@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 19:41:58 UTC
Permalink
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a
while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a
coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here
after tomorrow.
Do they have explicit scenarios for the acceptance criteria? If so, you
can split the stories along those lines.

If not, I'd work on that. Otherwise it's fuzzy to tell when a story is done.

- George
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi.
You don't really need any arguments.
If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you are addressing that.
Cool.
The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No heroics.
The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get done in a Sprint.
Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular
basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the
team to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of
each sprint.
This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.
#deliver
Thank you.
Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact <http://michaelvizdos.com/contact>
plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos <http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos>
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises <http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises>
twitter.com/mvizdos <http://twitter.com/mvizdos>
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------
Posted by: George Dinwiddie <***@iDIAcomputing.com>
------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
Michael Wollin yahoo@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 20:13:54 UTC
Permalink
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the Business Unit on that and they are making progress. What I’m requesting is more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you are done with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a sense of accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a
while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a
coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here
after tomorrow.
Do they have explicit scenarios for the acceptance criteria? If so, you
can split the stories along those lines.
If not, I'd work on that. Otherwise it's fuzzy to tell when a story is done.
- George
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi.
You don't really need any arguments.
If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you
are addressing that.
Cool.
The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No heroics.
The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get
done in a Sprint.
Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular
basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the
team to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of
each sprint.
This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.
#deliver
Thank you.
Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact <http://michaelvizdos.com/contact>
plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos <http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos>
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises <http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises>
twitter.com/mvizdos <http://twitter.com/mvizdos>
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Vizdos mvizdos@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 20:25:29 UTC
Permalink
If you are on the way out (sounds like you are) I am not sure the last
hurrah will help. Sounds like you have your ideas to coach them and it's
good stuff.

Remember as a coach or mentor you cannot control outcomes.

The team needs to know how to do this (figure it out) especially as the
coach is not usually in the system forever.

This is based on my experience.

Recommendation is to take your learnings from that engagement and figure
out what you will do differently with a team the next time. Remember, it's
all a restart with each new engagement or team and in the end we as coaches
or mentors have zero control of outcomes.

If you are in Orlando next week let me know and I'll buy the first round
Michael.

Thank you.

Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact

plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises
twitter.com/mvizdos
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the
Business Unit on that and they are making progress. What I’m requesting is
more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you are done
with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a sense of
accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a
while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a
coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here
after tomorrow.
Do they have explicit scenarios for the acceptance criteria? If so, you
can split the stories along those lines.
If not, I'd work on that. Otherwise it's fuzzy to tell when a story is done.
- George
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi.
You don't really need any arguments.
If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you
are addressing that.
Cool.
The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No
heroics.
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get
done in a Sprint.
Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular
basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the
team to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of
each sprint.
This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.
#deliver
Thank you.
Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact <http://michaelvizdos.com/contact>
plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos <http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos>
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises <http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises>
twitter.com/mvizdos <http://twitter.com/mvizdos>
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Wollin yahoo@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 20:42:48 UTC
Permalink
You're on! See you in Orlando. :)

Send me a meet time privately.

On Jul 24, 2014, at 4:25 PM, "Michael Vizdos ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <***@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

If you are on the way out (sounds like you are) I am not sure the last hurrah will help. Sounds like you have your ideas to coach them and it's good stuff.

Remember as a coach or mentor you cannot control outcomes.

The team needs to know how to do this (figure it out) especially as the coach is not usually in the system forever.

This is based on my experience.

Recommendation is to take your learnings from that engagement and figure out what you will do differently with a team the next time. Remember, it's all a restart with each new engagement or team and in the end we as coaches or mentors have zero control of outcomes.

If you are in Orlando next week let me know and I'll buy the first round Michael.

Thank you.

Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact

plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises
twitter.com/mvizdos
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the Business Unit on that and they are making progress. What I’m requesting is more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you are done with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a sense of accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a
while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a
coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here
after tomorrow.
Do they have explicit scenarios for the acceptance criteria? If so, you
can split the stories along those lines.
If not, I'd work on that. Otherwise it's fuzzy to tell when a story is done.
- George
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi.
You don't really need any arguments.
If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you
are addressing that.
Cool.
The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No heroics.
The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get
done in a Sprint.
Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular
basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the
team to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of
each sprint.
This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.
#deliver
Thank you.
Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact <http://michaelvizdos.com/contact>
plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos <http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos>
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises <http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises>
twitter.com/mvizdos <http://twitter.com/mvizdos>
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 20:29:18 UTC
Permalink
If all of the work for the sprint is done an no one has anything to do then
I don't see any good reason not to deliver, retrospect, and take on more
work the next time.

That is very rare, in my experience. Usually when people want more work
some are done and others aren't. In that case the right thing to do is help
the others finish, but they either don't want to or it is so contrary to
the culture that it doesn't even occur to them.

Is either of those similar to your situation?
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the
Business Unit on that and they are making progress. What I’m requesting is
more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you are done
with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a sense of
accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a
while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a
coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here
after tomorrow.
Do they have explicit scenarios for the acceptance criteria? If so, you
can split the stories along those lines.
If not, I'd work on that. Otherwise it's fuzzy to tell when a story is done.
- George
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi.
You don't really need any arguments.
If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you
are addressing that.
Cool.
The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No
heroics.
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get
done in a Sprint.
Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular
basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the
team to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of
each sprint.
This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.
#deliver
Thank you.
Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact <http://michaelvizdos.com/contact>
plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos <http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos>
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises <http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises>
twitter.com/mvizdos <http://twitter.com/mvizdos>
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
George Dinwiddie lists@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 21:48:53 UTC
Permalink
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the
Business Unit on that and they are making progress.
I recommend that the Business Unit not do it in isolation. I suggest the
Three Amigos approach as more beneficial.
http://www.agileconnection.com/article/three-amigos-strategy-developing-user-stories
http://manage.techwell.com/articles/weekly/three-amigos
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
What I’m requesting
is more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you
are done with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a
sense of accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
If you've got capacity to do more than you expected, and you can split a
slice of an upcoming story and accomplish it, why is it a bad idea? If
they can regularly pull more work into the spring, they might ponder why
they're shy of taking it on in the first place.

- George
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I have to convince people. They will not have smaller stories for a
while. So what can I say to have them want to stop this behavior? I am a
coach until tomorrow. I have no enforcement power and I won't be here
after tomorrow.
Do they have explicit scenarios for the acceptance criteria? If so, you
can split the stories along those lines.
If not, I'd work on that. Otherwise it's fuzzy to tell when a story is done.
- George
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi.
You don't really need any arguments.
If the stories are too big then break them down more. Sounds like you
are addressing that.
Cool.
The team is responsible for delivering. All of them. Together. No
heroics.
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
The team is responsible for pulling in the work they think they can get
done in a Sprint.
Stretch goals, Sprint 0, abnormally terminating sprints (on a regular
basis) and pulling stories into a Sprint are all good fodder for the
team to figure out how to improve during the retrospective at the end of
each sprint.
This is a simple framework. Don't over think it.
#deliver
Thank you.
Mike Vizdos
michaelvizdos.com/contact
<http://michaelvizdos.com/contact><http://michaelvizdos.com/contact>
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos
<http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos><http://plus.google.com/+MichaelVizdos>
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises
<http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises><http://facebook.com/VizdosEnterprises>
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
twitter.com/mvizdos
<http://twitter.com/mvizdos><http://twitter.com/mvizdos>
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie *http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
<http://blog.gdinwiddie.com/>
Software Developmenthttp://www.idiacomputing.com
<http://www.idiacomputing.com/>
Consultant and Coachhttp://www.agilemaryland.org
<http://www.agilemaryland.org/>
----------------------------------------------------------
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------

------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 10:57:59 UTC
Permalink
Michael,
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the Business Unit on that and they are making progress. What I’m requesting is more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you are done with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a sense of accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
If the team is quite good, it is harmless. If they are merely humanly good, they will almost certainly wind up valuing stories over housekeeping like testing and keeping the design fresh, and the result will be that they are writing more legacy code every day.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
If it is more than you need, it is waste. -- Andy Seidl
Michael Wollin yahoo@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 11:10:12 UTC
Permalink
True that, Ron. And they operate like Eloi hoping the Morlocks pick someone else to stack rank lower than them this review cycle. I bashed a few Morlocks and handed them the club. The rest is up to them.

On Jul 25, 2014, at 6:57 AM, "Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <***@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Michael,
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the Business Unit on that and they are making progress. What I’m requesting is more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you are done with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a sense of accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
If the team is quite good, it is harmless. If they are merely humanly good, they will almost certainly wind up valuing stories over housekeeping like testing and keeping the design fresh, and the result will be that they are writing more legacy code every day.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
If it is more than you need, it is waste. -- Andy Seidl
Daniel Wildt dwildt@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 14:21:34 UTC
Permalink
I believe we need to gather all technical debit and use this "available
time" do work on that.

In a previous team, we had a technical debt spreadsheet prioritised (based
on legacy stuff and refactoring opportunities) and whenever we had time
available in the end of the iteration, it was total focus on that
spreadsheet to minimize impact on code and bring more code quality, more
testing and refactoring. The focus was to keep the code clean.


-- Daniel Wildt (+55 51 99989030) - @dwildt <http://twitter.com/dwildt>
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Michael,
I am not requesting suggestions on splitting stories. I am coaching the
Business Unit on that and they are making progress. What I’m requesting is
more and compelling reasons that pre-fetching stories (because you are done
with the sprint) is a bad idea (i.e. it throws off cadence, a sense of
accomplishment, velocity measures, innovation). What else?
If the team is quite good, it is harmless. If they are merely humanly
good, they will almost certainly wind up valuing stories over housekeeping
like testing and keeping the design fresh, and the result will be that they
are writing more legacy code every day.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com <http://www.xprogramming.com>
If it is more than you need, it is waste. -- Andy Seidl
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 14:37:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I believe we need to gather all technical debit and use this "available
time" do work on that.
Note that while we do accept technical debit there will be a hold of an
additional 20%... :-D

If you are creating technical debt then you don't have "available time".
You said you were done when you weren't.
Daniel Wildt dwildt@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 15:40:00 UTC
Permalink
That's based on legacy stuff. Not new stuff.

-- Daniel Wildt (+55 51 99989030) - @dwildt <http://twitter.com/dwildt>
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I believe we need to gather all technical debit and use this "available
time" do work on that.
Note that while we do accept technical debit there will be a hold of an
additional 20%... :-D
If you are creating technical debt then you don't have "available time".
You said you were done when you weren't.
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 16:21:36 UTC
Permalink
That's a little bit different, but not as much as you think. It is still
incorrect to claim that you have "available time" at the end of the sprint
if the code is not as clean (or as well tested) as it should be. You simply
aren't done. Whether or not you deploy undone code is, unfortunately, a
decision you can make. Most code in the wild is a bit half-baked in my
experience.

The team's responsibility is to make the code as clean as possible while
delivering at the end of every sprint. If things aren't getting better that
means they are probably getting worse, which means the team is not doing
its job.

While it is exceedingly common to abdicate this responsibility and allow
the product owner to choose/prioritize quality, it is an antipattern and a
recipe for mediocrity (at best.)
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
That's based on legacy stuff. Not new stuff.
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I believe we need to gather all technical debit and use this "available
time" do work on that.
Note that while we do accept technical debit there will be a hold of an
additional 20%... :-D
If you are creating technical debt then you don't have "available time".
You said you were done when you weren't.
Daniel Wildt dwildt@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 16:55:30 UTC
Permalink
Quality is not optional in my opinion. We have to deliver always the best
feature with the best quality possible.

But, what if a team is starting with Agile and got already a lot of
technical debt? You need to find ways to address delivery with refactoring
opportunities.

Same happens when architecture is evolving. We need to face refactoring and
we need to adapt from time to time, as the software is scaling.

Right?



-- Daniel Wildt (+55 51 99989030) - @dwildt <http://twitter.com/dwildt>
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
That's a little bit different, but not as much as you think. It is still
incorrect to claim that you have "available time" at the end of the sprint
if the code is not as clean (or as well tested) as it should be. You simply
aren't done. Whether or not you deploy undone code is, unfortunately, a
decision you can make. Most code in the wild is a bit half-baked in my
experience.
The team's responsibility is to make the code as clean as possible while
delivering at the end of every sprint. If things aren't getting better that
means they are probably getting worse, which means the team is not doing
its job.
While it is exceedingly common to abdicate this responsibility and allow
the product owner to choose/prioritize quality, it is an antipattern and a
recipe for mediocrity (at best.)
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
That's based on legacy stuff. Not new stuff.
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I believe we need to gather all technical debit and use this "available
time" do work on that.
Note that while we do accept technical debit there will be a hold of an
additional 20%... :-D
If you are creating technical debt then you don't have "available time".
You said you were done when you weren't.
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 16:56:53 UTC
Permalink
Daniel,
But, what if a team is starting with Agile and got already a lot of technical debt? You need to find ways to address delivery with refactoring opportunities.
Same happens when architecture is evolving. We need to face refactoring and we need to adapt from time to time, as the software is scaling.
Right?
Right. The thing to do is to refactor where you’re working anyway, a little more than you otherwise might, so as to make steady progress in improving the areas where you’re working.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Before you contradict an old man, my fair friend, you should endeavor to understand him. - George Santayana
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 17:02:39 UTC
Permalink
Right. As long as it is trending in the right direction you are in a good
place. If you have a whole lot of technical debt you might want to work to
optimize the rate at which you improve it so that you get to a state you
are happy with in a reasonable amount of time, but if things are getting
better you are doing at least practicing legacy refactoring as intended.

BTW, I know I sound like a broken record, but the keys to optimizing it are
small stories and fast automated tests.
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Daniel,
But, what if a team is starting with Agile and got already a lot of
technical debt? You need to find ways to address delivery with refactoring
opportunities.
Same happens when architecture is evolving. We need to face refactoring
and we need to adapt from time to time, as the software is scaling.
Right?
Right. The thing to do is to refactor where you’re working anyway, a
little more than you otherwise might, so as to make steady progress in
improving the areas where you’re working.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Before you contradict an old man, my fair friend, you should endeavor to
understand him. - George Santayana
Daniel Wildt dwildt@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 17:08:31 UTC
Permalink
Yes! Minimize variation with small stories, automated tests and more
customer feedback as possible.

That's the rule In my current team. We also use a lot feature toggles to
deliver fast and improve faster, in order to deliver features to production
in a flow where we can control rollout of every big feature.

-- Daniel Wildt (+55 51 99989030) - @dwildt <http://twitter.com/dwildt>
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Right. As long as it is trending in the right direction you are in a good
place. If you have a whole lot of technical debt you might want to work to
optimize the rate at which you improve it so that you get to a state you
are happy with in a reasonable amount of time, but if things are getting
better you are doing at least practicing legacy refactoring as intended.
BTW, I know I sound like a broken record, but the keys to optimizing it
are small stories and fast automated tests.
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Daniel,
But, what if a team is starting with Agile and got already a lot of
technical debt? You need to find ways to address delivery with refactoring
opportunities.
Same happens when architecture is evolving. We need to face refactoring
and we need to adapt from time to time, as the software is scaling.
Right?
Right. The thing to do is to refactor where you’re working anyway, a
little more than you otherwise might, so as to make steady progress in
improving the areas where you’re working.
Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Before you contradict an old man, my fair friend, you should endeavor to
understand him. - George Santayana
George Dinwiddie lists@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 20:15:49 UTC
Permalink
Daniel,
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Quality is not optional in my opinion. We have to deliver always the
best feature with the best quality possible.
But, what if a team is starting with Agile and got already a lot of
technical debt? You need to find ways to address delivery with
refactoring opportunities.
Yes, but it can be wandering in the wilderness if you're cleaning it up
for the sake of cleaning it up. Better to have an explicit goal you want
to accomplish, and clean it up in service to that goal. The Mikado
Method can help a lot with that approach.

- George
Post by Daniel Wildt ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Same happens when architecture is evolving. We need to face refactoring
and we need to adapt from time to time, as the software is scaling.
Right?
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
__
That's a little bit different, but not as much as you think. It is
still incorrect to claim that you have "available time" at the end
of the sprint if the code is not as clean (or as well tested) as it
should be. You simply aren't done. Whether or not you deploy undone
code is, unfortunately, a decision you can make. Most code in the
wild is a bit half-baked in my experience.
The team's responsibility is to make the code as clean as
possible while delivering at the end of every sprint. If things
aren't getting better that means they are probably getting worse,
which means the team is not doing its job.
While it is exceedingly common to abdicate this responsibility and
allow the product owner to choose/prioritize quality, it is an
antipattern and a recipe for mediocrity (at best.)
__
That's based on legacy stuff. Not new stuff.
-- Daniel Wildt (+55 51 99989030 <tel:%28%2B55%2051%2099989030>)
-- Conheça meu livro http://vivaseutempo.danielwildt.com
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Adam Sroka
__
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 7:21 AM, Daniel Wildt
__
I believe we need to gather all technical debit and use
this "available time" do work on that.
Note that while we do accept technical debit there will be a
hold of an additional 20%... :-D
If you are creating technical debt then you don't have
"available time". You said you were done when you weren't.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------
Posted by: George Dinwiddie <***@iDIAcomputing.com>
------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
hennadii.omelchenko@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 18:18:15 UTC
Permalink
So, what's wrong with 'pre-fetching'?

Isn't is supposed to be done that way? I mean if the team is done with the committed set of user stories (or PBIs), they take next PBIs from the top of the backlog, plan them and get to work on them?
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-28 23:23:16 UTC
Permalink
Nothing, per se. The problem comes when they a) take on work that is not
likely to be finished in the current sprint (e.g. A five day story on day
seven of a ten day sprint) or b) take on new work in lieu of helping
someone else finish work in progress that might not be finished before the
end of the sprint (or at least could be completed sooner with assistance).
Post by ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
So, what's wrong with 'pre-fetching'?
Isn't is supposed to be done that way? I mean if the team is done with the
committed set of user stories (or PBIs), they take next PBIs from the top
of the backlog, plan them and get to work on them?
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-28 23:29:57 UTC
Permalink
Also, it really only works if there are small, high priority stories that
can be swapped in. Otherwise you might as well end the sprint early and
plan the highest priority stuff.
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Nothing, per se. The problem comes when they a) take on work that is not
likely to be finished in the current sprint (e.g. A five day story on day
seven of a ten day sprint) or b) take on new work in lieu of helping
someone else finish work in progress that might not be finished before the
end of the sprint (or at least could be completed sooner with assistance).
Post by ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
So, what's wrong with 'pre-fetching'?
Isn't is supposed to be done that way? I mean if the team is done with
the committed set of user stories (or PBIs), they take next PBIs from the
top of the backlog, plan them and get to work on them?
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 18:44:36 UTC
Permalink
As with most problems there are two sides to this coin, one technical and
one business related. Smaller stories are, of course, the preferred
solution. They force the team to keep the design simple and automate
repetitive tasks, both of which are desirable for a whole list of reasons.
They also allow the product owner more fine-grained control over
priorities, and reduce cycle times and delays. How to get there from where
we are today is always the hard part. It is unfortunate that most companies
wait until they are mature and earning revenue to even consider these
issues. Like cooking, it's easier and more fun if you clean up as you go
than if you wait until the end.

The other thing that I would look for is people working alone on anything.
Usually when I see team members asking for more work midway through the
sprint it is because they are disinclined to help anyone else. At the start
of the sprint everyone takes ownership of a story and they don't really
discuss or share it until the end unless they have a problem that they
think will prevent them from finishing on time. This is a bad way to work.
It delays feedback and compounds the risk of errors or misunderstandings.
It creates silos of knowledge and limits the availability of new ideas and
information.

Ideally the whole team would be able to take something on and get it done
in less than a day. For larger teams or complex environments that may be
impractical, but everything should be done by a pair, at least, and ideally
pairs switch often enough that no less than three or four have their
fingers in it before it gets deployed. If the team can't do this on their
own, give them one thing at a time and don't give them anything else until
they have demonstrated a working, tested solution.
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they
can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway.
I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate,
speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem
is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some
eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
Charles Bradley - Professional Scrum Trainer and Coach chuck-lists2@emailchuck.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-25 17:21:30 UTC
Permalink
(paraphrasing - make it sound nicer when you do it!)

I essentially coach that the Dev Team is a *team* and as such, are *all* accountable for the *entire* Sprint Backlog.  As such, anytime someone tells me they are idle(what I call "spare moments") while other work is still in progress, I automatically make the point there needs to be an effort to spread the skills needed(by the other work in progress) across the team... that individuals need to be willing to work outside of their specialties.  If they are unwilling or unable to do that, then whole team accountability is lost, and indeed the whole notion of a *team* is lost, and they are no longer doing what's best for the company, not to mention Scrum.


This is extremely context sensitive, but, usually, my first suggestions are:
* Talk to your fellow dev team members.  While there may not be a task on the Sprint Backlog (task board) that you think you can take, your fellow dev team members might have something you can do to help out.

* Pair with someone to learn those needed scarce skills.  Clearly you have a skill scarcity problem because the team is not yet effective at swarming without idleness.  Manual (functional) testing is usually good target for having people pitch in outside their specialty -- and pairing is a good start.  Also, pair on other things -- pair on programming, designing, etc.  If you're a programmer, maybe you can find another programmer who has a piece you can break off and work on.... but maybe better... how about just pair program with them?

* Programmers, you don't want to do manual testing? Fine, then every spare moment you have from now on will be dedicated to you and other programmers learning how to do automated testing (unit and service level tests).  Until you can automate ~~70%+ of your unit and service level tests, you are not done learning how to automate tests.  Also, you need to spread these skills and knowledege across the team, even if certain team members can only understand it at a lay level.

* Testers, you can't do programming?  Fine, then every spare moment you have will be dedicated to flushing out test cases/acceptance tests(for User Stories) using the techniques of "Specification By Example" and other story testing techniques.  OR, you can start learning how to automate tests at the service and ui layers of the app.  Until you can automate ~~70%+
of your ui and service level tests, you are not done learning how to
automate tests.  Also, you need to spread these skills and knowledge
across the team, even if certain team members can only understand it at a lay level.
* I can usually talk people with other specialties into one of the two above efforts or similar efforts.
* Your stories seem too big to pull into the Sprint?  Fine, then use some spare moments to learn how to split stories into smaller sizes.

* How about you spend some time working on some of those improvement suggestions that you all keep coming up with?  Maybe build a Dev Team Improvement Backlog.
* Regardless of what you do, consult your team, self organize, and try to find something like the above to do during your spare moments -- something that helps out the team in its pursuit of delighting customers.  Only take on new work(PBI's) if you have "spare capacity"(see below for definition)

 
Caveats:

* My suggestions tend to be context sensitive, so the above is just an example of what usually seems like good fodder in most of the contexts I work in.  Yours might be different, so be contextually sensitive.  Maybe there are some external dependencies or other potentially impediments that could use some work during spare moments, etc.  Whatever seems like good stuff to work on rather than pre-fetching.
* "Spare moments" vs. "spare capacity" -- I make a distinction between spare moments and spare capacity.  Spare moments are usually smaller amounts of time, usually temporary (meaning other fruitful work will appear soon), and usually localized to 1 or 2 individuals at any given moment.  Spare capacity usually means larger amounts of time, and more people available/idle.  In that case, then the Dev Team has the choice to work with the PO to consider "fetching" the next story.  I say *choice*, because maybe instead, the team wants to do the above improvement activities instead, and this is the Dev Team's choice here -- whether to do improvement activities or take on new work.

* Scrum does not mandate that individuals be cross functional, only that Dev Teams be cross functional.  However, the more cross functional individuals are on the team, the less likely you'll have spare moments or someone saying "I don't have anything to work on"

The big problem with pre-fetching, in my mind, is that it is a slippery slope back to waterfall.  What the person is often communicating when they do this is...."There is nothing inside of my specialty/silo that I can do right now, so I'll get started on the next thing in my specialty/silo".  If everyone did this, then you'd be back to silos/waterfall/too much WIP/nightmare and "groups" of people rather than a "team" of people.  Another dysfunction displayed by all of this is the fallacy of 100% utilization.  Or, maybe it's time for this person with spare moments to just take a break and relax a bit!

Sorry for the ramble.  Just trying to give ideas.  :-)
 
-------
Charles Bradley
Professional Scrum Trainer
Scrum Coach-in-Chief
http://ScrumCrazy.com
________________________________
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2014 10:30 AM
Subject: [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] Stop Prefetching Stories
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
 
           
AgileConnection | Management Myth #1: The Myth of 10...
Too many managers believe in the myth of 100% utilization—the belief that every single technical person must be fully utilized every single minute of every single d...
View on www.agileconnectio... Preview by Yahoo
David Grant david.grant@adaptivelogic.co.uk [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 16:41:39 UTC
Permalink
The number 1 argument I've used in the past is that you don't know for sure

which way you're going to go after the sprint review, so working on a new
story is potential waste. It would be completely within the rights of the
PO to say, "Thanks folks, that'll do for now.".


You're right that the stories being too large (or at least not varied
enough) is something you need to change, so why not ask the team to help
with that?


Dave
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they
can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway.
I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate,
speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem
is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some
eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
--
David Grant CSM CSP


Agile Coach
Adaptive Logic Consulting Ltd <http://adaptivelogic.co.uk/>


<http://www.linkedin.com/company/adaptive-logic-consulting-ltd>
<https://twitter.com/adaptive_logic>
<https://www.facebook.com/adaptivelogic>
<https://plus.google.com/116342766487710523619>
Cass Dalton cassdalton73@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-24 16:54:57 UTC
Permalink
I don't know if it's the right answer, but we typically commit to stretch
goals in a sprint (a few more stories than the team thinks they can
confidently achieve) in case the team over achieves. Every sprint has a
couple of stories that are in progress and the demo is essentially the
snapshot of what is done and ready on that day.
Post by Michael Wollin ***@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know they
can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are idle anyway.
I argue that they should find something else to do like read, innovate,
speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping pong. Part of the problem
is their stories are too big and we are addressing that. But I’d like some
eloquence around as many supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-29 00:00:53 UTC
Permalink
Cass,
I don't know if it's the right answer, but we typically commit to stretch goals in a sprint (a few more stories than the team thinks they can confidently achieve) in case the team over achieves. Every sprint has a couple of stories that are in progress and the demo is essentially the snapshot of what is done and ready on that day.
I despise "stretch goals" in almost every instance. In too many cases, they just amount to a way for the team to appear to fail despite doing just fine. Too hard to use well, they militate against clean code and comprehensive testing, and don't really accomplish anything particularly useful. All in my opinion of course.

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Wisdom begins when we learn the difference between "that makes no sense" and "I don't understand". -- Mary Doria Russell
Michael James mj4scrum@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-29 01:08:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I despise "stretch goals" in almost every instance. In too many cases, they just amount to a way for the team to appear to fail despite doing just fine. Too hard to use well, they militate against clean code and comprehensive testing, and don't really accomplish anything particularly useful. All in my opinion of course.
And mine, though I can't speak for every situation.

All these things seem to spring from Sprints and batches that are too big. Shorten the Sprint, reduce the work in progress, so the capacity estimates don't matter so much.

--mj
(Michael)
Adam Sroka adam.sroka@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-29 01:47:12 UTC
Permalink
Yeah. If we're talking root cause I have seen: stories that are too big,
sprints that are too long, or people seeking to be busy because they
perceive (generally correctly) that they are expected to be.
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I despise "stretch goals" in almost every instance. In too many cases,
they just amount to a way for the team to appear to fail despite doing just
fine. Too hard to use well, they militate against clean code and
comprehensive testing, and don't really accomplish anything particularly
useful. All in my opinion of course.
And mine, though I can't speak for every situation.
All these things seem to spring from Sprints and batches that are too big.
Shorten the Sprint, reduce the work in progress, so the capacity estimates
don't matter so much.
--mj
(Michael)
Michael Wollin yahoo@mercurysw.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-29 03:53:34 UTC
Permalink
Stories being too big was the principal culprit, but they were in the habit of "staying busy." So they would start stories they had no chance of finishing.

The burndown charts out of Rally were goofy cause they would never burn down, and it was weird that it didn't bother anyone. For the life of me I could never figure out what they were using those burndown charts for, but they printed them and posted them and shared them.

On Jul 28, 2014, at 9:47 PM, "Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]" <***@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

Yeah. If we're talking root cause I have seen: stories that are too big, sprints that are too long, or people seeking to be busy because they perceive (generally correctly) that they are expected to be.
Post by Michael James ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I despise "stretch goals" in almost every instance. In too many cases, they just amount to a way for the team to appear to fail despite doing just fine. Too hard to use well, they militate against clean code and comprehensive testing, and don't really accomplish anything particularly useful. All in my opinion of course.
And mine, though I can't speak for every situation.
All these things seem to spring from Sprints and batches that are too big. Shorten the Sprint, reduce the work in progress, so the capacity estimates don't matter so much.
--mj
(Michael)
Cass Dalton cassdalton73@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-07-29 03:13:05 UTC
Permalink
Adam, Michael, and Ron.
I am very interested to hear more. This issue is relevant to our team. I
will say that the appearance of failure is not an issue. We are a
fortunate situation where our organization is looking to us to understand
what agile means and no one is looking at a completion rate of 80-90% as
failure. And our stories are all 2-3 days on average. When there are 4
stories in progress or in review at the end of a sprint, that represents
about 4-6 man days of unfinished work after a sprint of 50 man days.
Can you provide more details about why this is bad? Is it just that
there's always more testing to be done? Why wouldn't a team want to shoot
for stretch goals? I was thinking that those stretch goals were a path to
continual improvement. I'm also afraid that as the team finishes their
stories and transitions to clean up, we start to fall into mini-waterfall
with 8 days of development and 2 days of integration.


I'm very interested in any thoughts, ideas, and opinions you have.


-Cass
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Yeah. If we're talking root cause I have seen: stories that are too big,
sprints that are too long, or people seeking to be busy because they
perceive (generally correctly) that they are expected to be.
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I despise "stretch goals" in almost every instance. In too many cases,
they just amount to a way for the team to appear to fail despite doing just
fine. Too hard to use well, they militate against clean code and
comprehensive testing, and don't really accomplish anything particularly
useful. All in my opinion of course.
And mine, though I can't speak for every situation.
All these things seem to spring from Sprints and batches that are too
big. Shorten the Sprint, reduce the work in progress, so the capacity
estimates don't matter so much.
--mj
(Michael)
George Dinwiddie lists@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-04 19:36:09 UTC
Permalink
Cass,
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Adam, Michael, and Ron.
I am very interested to hear more. This issue is relevant to our team.
I will say that the appearance of failure is not an issue. We are a
fortunate situation where our organization is looking to us to
understand what agile means and no one is looking at a completion rate
of 80-90% as failure. And our stories are all 2-3 days on average.
When there are 4 stories in progress or in review at the end of a
sprint, that represents about 4-6 man days of unfinished work after a
sprint of 50 man days.
What would it take to get this down to 1 or two stories in progress?

I don't know how big your team is, but a WIP of 4 stories sounds big to
me, and would hamper changing direction. How many people swarm over one
story?
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Can you provide more details about why this is bad? Is it just that
there's always more testing to be done? Why wouldn't a team want to
shoot for stretch goals? I was thinking that those stretch goals were a
path to continual improvement. I'm also afraid that as the team
finishes their stories and transitions to clean up, we start to fall
into mini-waterfall with 8 days of development and 2 days of integration.
Can you tell me more about why integration is separated from development?

- George
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I'm very interested in any thoughts, ideas, and opinions you have.
-Cass
__
Yeah. If we're talking root cause I have seen: stories that are too
big, sprints that are too long, or people seeking to be busy because
they perceive (generally correctly) that they are expected to be.
__
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I despise "stretch goals" in almost every instance. In too
many cases, they just amount to a way for the team to appear
to fail despite doing just fine. Too hard to use well, they
militate against clean code and comprehensive testing, and
don't really accomplish anything particularly useful. All in
my opinion of course.
And mine, though I can't speak for every situation.
All these things seem to spring from Sprints and batches that
are too big. Shorten the Sprint, reduce the work in progress,
so the capacity estimates don't matter so much.
--mj
(Michael)
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------
Posted by: George Dinwiddie <***@iDIAcomputing.com>
------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-04 19:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Cass,
I am very interested to hear more. This issue is relevant to our team. I will say that the appearance of failure is not an issue. We are a fortunate situation where our organization is looking to us to understand what agile means and no one is looking at a completion rate of 80-90% as failure. And our stories are all 2-3 days on average. When there are 4 stories in progress or in review at the end of a sprint, that represents about 4-6 man days of unfinished work after a sprint of 50 man days.
Can you provide more details about why this is bad? Is it just that there's always more testing to be done? Why wouldn't a team want to shoot for stretch goals? I was thinking that those stretch goals were a path to continual improvement. I'm also afraid that as the team finishes their stories and transitions to clean up, we start to fall into mini-waterfall with 8 days of development and 2 days of integration.
You can of course do what you want.

I believe that improving speed is not a result of trying to go faster but a result of learning to go better.

I believe that predicting what you are going to do and then doing it is greater evidence of skill than predicting what you might do and doing most of it.

I believe that 10 percent unfinished work per sprint is not impressive.

I believe that a close inspection will find that the “undone” work is not limited to the stories that you think are not done.

I believe that if Chet and I visited your team and looked at your code, we would quickly find crufty bits needing refactoring.

I believe that we would find more crufty bits in the stories that are not done and then taken up again than in the ones that are done, but that we would find significant flaws in both classes.

I believe that it is nearly impossible to avoid stretching to meet stretch goals, and that stretching will inevitably result in poorer testing and poorer code.

I could be wrong. And you should do as you see fit.

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
Seyit Caglar Abbasoglu scabbasoglu@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-05 14:09:19 UTC
Permalink
I imagine, if team members focus on 2 stories instead of 4, they can
probably finish at least one of them before the end of the sprint, release
(or at least demo) that story, and produce business value and/or acquire
more knowledge.
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Adam, Michael, and Ron.
I am very interested to hear more. This issue is relevant to our team. I
will say that the appearance of failure is not an issue. We are a
fortunate situation where our organization is looking to us to understand
what agile means and no one is looking at a completion rate of 80-90% as
failure. And our stories are all 2-3 days on average. When there are 4
stories in progress or in review at the end of a sprint, that represents
about 4-6 man days of unfinished work after a sprint of 50 man days.
Can you provide more details about why this is bad? Is it just that
there's always more testing to be done? Why wouldn't a team want to shoot
for stretch goals? I was thinking that those stretch goals were a path to
continual improvement. I'm also afraid that as the team finishes their
stories and transitions to clean up, we start to fall into mini-waterfall
with 8 days of development and 2 days of integration.
I'm very interested in any thoughts, ideas, and opinions you have.
-Cass
Post by Adam Sroka ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Yeah. If we're talking root cause I have seen: stories that are too big,
sprints that are too long, or people seeking to be busy because they
perceive (generally correctly) that they are expected to be.
Post by Ron Jeffries ***@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I despise "stretch goals" in almost every instance. In too many cases,
they just amount to a way for the team to appear to fail despite doing just
fine. Too hard to use well, they militate against clean code and
comprehensive testing, and don't really accomplish anything particularly
useful. All in my opinion of course.
And mine, though I can't speak for every situation.
All these things seem to spring from Sprints and batches that are too
big. Shorten the Sprint, reduce the work in progress, so the capacity
estimates don't matter so much.
--mj
(Michael)
George Dinwiddie lists@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-04 13:07:28 UTC
Permalink
Hi, Cass,
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I don't know if it's the right answer, but we typically commit to
stretch goals in a sprint (a few more stories than the team thinks they
can confidently achieve) in case the team over achieves. Every sprint
has a couple of stories that are in progress and the demo is essentially
the snapshot of what is done and ready on that day.
Do you and your teammates get a sense of accomplishment at the end of
the sprint?

That's a problem I've seen with teams that over-commit all the time.
They always feel a sense of "not good enough." And, as mentioned by
others, that usually leads to hurrying to do new functionality rather
than making sure what's done is done as well as they can. The nuisance
of working in a messy code base also contributes to the sense that they
need to hurry, since things take longer than imagined.

You may not have this problem, but I urge you to keep an eye open for it.

Also, if you're not trying to observe the sprint boundaries, why not
switch to a kanban approach? You can keep your current cadences for
planning, demonstrating, and retrospecting. The difference would be
that, instead of using getting things accomplished within the sprint
boundaries to limit WIP (which you're apparently not doing), you'd
explicitly limit WIP.

Just some thoughts to consider.

- George
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------
Posted by: George Dinwiddie <***@iDIAcomputing.com>
------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
Cass Dalton cassdalton73@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-04 16:07:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Do you and your teammates get a sense of accomplishment at the end of
the sprint?


Very much so. That is not usually a problem. In our current team, a few
of the guys felt really pressured in the first sprint to get all the
stories done. But they noted that they felt the pressure go away when they
realized that I wasn't going to condemn them for not hitting
the commitment. I feel that those types of issues can be managed if you
are really stressing the whole team approach (i.e. Whole scrum team
including PO and SM). To me it feels weird to "fix" the feeling of "not
good enough" by committing to less instead of helping the team understand
that the commitments are for them and not form management. Maybe I'm
blessed with PMs that don't micro-manage that way. If a team can't see
past a percent complete to see the amount of actual work that
they accomplished, then I think they are still on the wrong side of
Individuals and Interactions over Processes and Tools (the burndown chart
is just another tool).


I think it's the discussion about WIP that I'm after. I definitely get the
fact that inexperienced teams need to get better at things like testing and
refactoring and that often when they think they're done they're not really
done. But I would think that after a while, when a team think's its done
with all the stories, they really are done with the stories. In other
words, that inexperience will (hopefully) go away. Maybe I'm just
optimistic. But if the team commits to 20 points and is really done with
20 points and has a day or two left in the sprint, what do you do? Ending
the sprint early seems wrong because part of what I like about Scrum is the
rhythm. You could let the team free play and do things like fix issues,
but that seems counter to most of the user value focus of agile. You could
let them do more demo prep, but that feels like falling into a
mini-waterfall where the team starts relying on having a "clean up" day.


I wouldn't have said that I'm not trying to observe sprint boundaries. I
would have said that I don't want the sprint demo to become so important
that the event becomes more important than value generation of the rest of
the sprint. I feel like if you have to allocate time at the end of a
sprint to clean things up, then that implies a deficiency in your adherence
to DoD as you complete stories. I feel that choosing to tidy up existing
work for the purpose of making a smoother demo instead of looking at new
work can become a crutch that the team will start to rely on where they
will defer implementing everything right about a story because they can
always clean it up before the demo. It's just that type of crutch that
fuels the "Scrum is dumb" fire from the likes of Frank D'Andrea (
http://igniteshow.com/videos/ignite-tao-v4-may-162013-frank-dandrea).


So maybe I want Kanban more than I think I do. But I like the rhythm of
Scrum. I like the whole team oscillation between focused analysis and
focused execution. I know I said I don't want mini-waterfall,
but deferring integration to the end of sprint is different than the
mental oscillation between the analysis of the planning session or backlog
grooming and the focused execution of the bulk of the sprint. That
oscillation gives people new to agile a defined feedback cycle in which to
learn to apply the empirical part of agile. That opportunity for the
entire team to step back and think about things for a moment is very
important when you're trying to undo traditional habits and mindsets and
when you're trying to show how emergent design actually gets you better
results.
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Hi, Cass,
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I don't know if it's the right answer, but we typically commit to
stretch goals in a sprint (a few more stories than the team thinks they
can confidently achieve) in case the team over achieves. Every sprint
has a couple of stories that are in progress and the demo is essentially
the snapshot of what is done and ready on that day.
Do you and your teammates get a sense of accomplishment at the end of
the sprint?
That's a problem I've seen with teams that over-commit all the time.
They always feel a sense of "not good enough." And, as mentioned by
others, that usually leads to hurrying to do new functionality rather
than making sure what's done is done as well as they can. The nuisance
of working in a messy code base also contributes to the sense that they
need to hurry, since things take longer than imagined.
You may not have this problem, but I urge you to keep an eye open for it.
Also, if you're not trying to observe the sprint boundaries, why not
switch to a kanban approach? You can keep your current cadences for
planning, demonstrating, and retrospecting. The difference would be
that, instead of using getting things accomplished within the sprint
boundaries to limit WIP (which you're apparently not doing), you'd
explicitly limit WIP.
Just some thoughts to consider.
- George
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
Ron Jeffries ronjeffries@acm.org [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-04 19:21:55 UTC
Permalink
Cass,
I think it's the discussion about WIP that I'm after. I definitely get the fact that inexperienced teams need to get better at things like testing and refactoring and that often when they think they're done they're not really done. But I would think that after a while, when a team think's its done with all the stories, they really are done with the stories. In other words, that inexperience will (hopefully) go away. Maybe I'm just optimistic. But if the team commits to 20 points and is really done with 20 points and has a day or two left in the sprint, what do you do? Ending the sprint early seems wrong because part of what I like about Scrum is the rhythm. You could let the team free play and do things like fix issues, but that seems counter to most of the user value focus of agile. You could let them do more demo prep, but that feels like falling into a mini-waterfall where the team starts relying on having a "clean up" day.
Let them pull another story?

Ron Jeffries
www.XProgramming.com
Before you contradict an old man, my fair friend, you should endeavor to understand him. - George Santayana
George Dinwiddie lists@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-04 19:32:10 UTC
Permalink
Cass,

Thanks for the reply.
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Do you and your teammates get a sense of accomplishment at the end of
the sprint?
Very much so. That is not usually a problem. In our current team, a
few of the guys felt really pressured in the first sprint to get all the
stories done. But they noted that they felt the pressure go away when
they realized that I wasn't going to condemn them for not hitting
the commitment. I feel that those types of issues can be managed if you
are really stressing the whole team approach (i.e. Whole scrum team
including PO and SM). To me it feels weird to "fix" the feeling of "not
good enough" by committing to less instead of helping the team
understand that the commitments are for them and not form management.
Maybe I'm blessed with PMs that don't micro-manage that way. If a
team can't see past a percent complete to see the amount of actual work
that they accomplished, then I think they are still on the wrong side of
Individuals and Interactions over Processes and Tools (the burndown
chart is just another tool).
I wasn't worried about micromanagement (though if you had that, I would
be). Instead, I was worried about losing the sense of accomplishment
that comes from crossing off the last item in a list of things you set
out to do. That can be a big psychological boost. It shouldn't be the
only or even primary goal, but it's something to consider.
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I think it's the discussion about WIP that I'm after. I definitely get
the fact that inexperienced teams need to get better at things like
testing and refactoring and that often when they think they're done
they're not really done. But I would think that after a while, when a
team think's its done with all the stories, they really are done with
the stories. In other words, that inexperience will (hopefully) go
away. Maybe I'm just optimistic. But if the team commits to 20 points
and is really done with 20 points and has a day or two left in the
sprint, what do you do? Ending the sprint early seems wrong because
part of what I like about Scrum is the rhythm. You could let the team
free play and do things like fix issues, but that seems counter to most
of the user value focus of agile. You could let them do more demo prep,
but that feels like falling into a mini-waterfall where the team starts
relying on having a "clean up" day.
I think picking up the next story is OK, especially if you check with
the PO to see if it's really still the next one. There are other things
I might consider doing first.
- reviewing the current sprint's work for things that weren't as
finished as they might be
- discussing the design and the tests
- attending to a small bit of cleanup for something that's been
annoying, but you haven't felt you had enough time to address

All of these could be questionable, as well, but they're examples of
things I often find getting too-little attention. If they're addressing
current weak points, and chosen by the team as a whole (including PO),
they'll pay dividends.
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I wouldn't have said that I'm not trying to observe sprint boundaries.
Ah, I misunderstood you to say you were routinely picking more than
would fit in the sprint, thinking it didn't matter if it went over the
boundary.
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I would have said that I don't want the sprint demo to become so
important that the event becomes more important than value generation of
the rest of the sprint. I feel like if you have to allocate time at the
end of a sprint to clean things up, then that implies a deficiency in
your adherence to DoD as you complete stories. I feel that choosing to
tidy up existing work for the purpose of making a smoother demo instead
of looking at new work can become a crutch that the team will start to
rely on where they will defer implementing everything right about a
story because they can always clean it up before the demo. It's just
that type of crutch that fuels the "Scrum is dumb" fire from the likes
of Frank D'Andrea
(http://igniteshow.com/videos/ignite-tao-v4-may-162013-frank-dandrea).
Consider taking time at the end of a sprint to clean things up and
identify what sorts of uncleanness is being generated in the sprint, and
how you could do that clean up on-the-fly in the next sprint.
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
So maybe I want Kanban more than I think I do. But I like the rhythm of
Scrum. I like the whole team oscillation between focused analysis and
focused execution. I know I said I don't want mini-waterfall,
but deferring integration to the end of sprint is different than the
mental oscillation between the analysis of the planning session or
backlog grooming and the focused execution of the bulk of the sprint.
That oscillation gives people new to agile a defined feedback cycle in
which to learn to apply the empirical part of agile. That opportunity
for the entire team to step back and think about things for a moment is
very important when you're trying to undo traditional habits and
mindsets and when you're trying to show how emergent design actually
gets you better results.
I think there are advantages to the rhythm of time-boxed development.
Those that adopt a flow system without maintaining a pronounced cadence
seem to struggle. Similarly, those that adopt a time-boxed development
cycle without keeping WIP low also seem to struggle. Scrum and Kanban
differ in which they specify, and which people find good to add in practice.

Karl Scotland and I (with some others) explored this area in 2010:
http://availagility.co.uk/2010/10/04/a-root-cause-analysis-of-agile-practices/

- George
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
__
Hi, Cass,
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I don't know if it's the right answer, but we typically commit to
stretch goals in a sprint (a few more stories than the team
thinks they
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
can confidently achieve) in case the team over achieves. Every sprint
has a couple of stories that are in progress and the demo is
essentially
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
the snapshot of what is done and ready on that day.
Do you and your teammates get a sense of accomplishment at the end of
the sprint?
That's a problem I've seen with teams that over-commit all the time.
They always feel a sense of "not good enough." And, as mentioned by
others, that usually leads to hurrying to do new functionality rather
than making sure what's done is done as well as they can. The nuisance
of working in a messy code base also contributes to the sense that they
need to hurry, since things take longer than imagined.
You may not have this problem, but I urge you to keep an eye open for it.
Also, if you're not trying to observe the sprint boundaries, why not
switch to a kanban approach? You can keep your current cadences for
planning, demonstrating, and retrospecting. The difference would be
that, instead of using getting things accomplished within the sprint
boundaries to limit WIP (which you're apparently not doing), you'd
explicitly limit WIP.
Just some thoughts to consider.
- George
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Michael Wollin
[SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------
Posted by: George Dinwiddie <***@iDIAcomputing.com>
------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to: ***@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: SCRUMDEVELOPMENT-***@eGroups.com
Cass Dalton cassdalton73@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
2014-08-04 20:54:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Cass,
Thanks for the reply.
[SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] wrote:>
I think it's the discussion about WIP that I'm after. I definitely get
the fact that inexperienced teams need to get better at things like
testing and refactoring and that often when they think they're done
they're not really done. But I would think that after a while, when a
team think's its done with all the stories, they really are done with
the stories. In other words, that inexperience will (hopefully) go
away. Maybe I'm just optimistic. But if the team commits to 20 points
and is really done with 20 points and has a day or two left in the
sprint, what do you do? Ending the sprint early seems wrong because
part of what I like about Scrum is the rhythm. You could let the team
free play and do things like fix issues, but that seems counter to most
of the user value focus of agile. You could let them do more demo prep,
but that feels like falling into a mini-waterfall where the team starts
relying on having a "clean up" day.
I think picking up the next story is OK, especially if you check with
the PO to see if it's really still the next one. There are other things
I might consider doing first.
- reviewing the current sprint's work for things that weren't as
finished as they might be
- discussing the design and the tests
- attending to a small bit of cleanup for something that's been
annoying, but you haven't felt you had enough time to address
All of these could be questionable, as well, but they're examples of
things I often find getting too-little attention. If they're addressing
current weak points, and chosen by the team as a whole (including PO),
they'll pay dividends.
Our developers tend to overengineer. In an effort to highlight agile's
focus on only engineering what's needed for direct customer value, we have
been asserting that all the work in the sprint needs to be tied to customer

value. For example, one of the developers wanted to write something like
"As a developer, I want a debugging framework..." I refused to let that
story into the backlog and there was a lengthy discussion about how you
build solid software without "As a developer" stories. I guess part of my
fear is that they will see the end of a sprint as an opportunity to hide
developer stories and that will be no different than just writing developer
stories except that I don't have any say in prioritizing the work.
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I wouldn't have said that I'm not trying to observe sprint boundaries.
Ah, I misunderstood you to say you were routinely picking more than
would fit in the sprint, thinking it didn't matter if it went over the
boundary.
So maybe I want Kanban more than I think I do. But I like the rhythm of
Scrum. I like the whole team oscillation between focused analysis and
focused execution. I know I said I don't want mini-waterfall,
but deferring integration to the end of sprint is different than the
mental oscillation between the analysis of the planning session or
backlog grooming and the focused execution of the bulk of the sprint.
That oscillation gives people new to agile a defined feedback cycle in
which to learn to apply the empirical part of agile. That opportunity
for the entire team to step back and think about things for a moment is
very important when you're trying to undo traditional habits and
mindsets and when you're trying to show how emergent design actually
gets you better results.
I think there are advantages to the rhythm of time-boxed development.
Those that adopt a flow system without maintaining a pronounced cadence
seem to struggle. Similarly, those that adopt a time-boxed development
cycle without keeping WIP low also seem to struggle. Scrum and Kanban
differ in which they specify, and which people find good to add in practice.
Hmm.. described that way it does sound like I'm not trying to observe
sprint boundaries. And you're saying that one purpose of said boundaries
is limitation of WIP?
Post by George Dinwiddie ***@idiacomputing.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
http://availagility.co.uk/2010/10/04/a-root-cause-analysis-of-agile-practices/
- George
__
Hi, Cass,
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I don't know if it's the right answer, but we typically commit to
stretch goals in a sprint (a few more stories than the team
thinks they
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
can confidently achieve) in case the team over achieves. Every sprint
has a couple of stories that are in progress and the demo is
essentially
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
the snapshot of what is done and ready on that day.
Do you and your teammates get a sense of accomplishment at the end of
the sprint?
That's a problem I've seen with teams that over-commit all the time.
They always feel a sense of "not good enough." And, as mentioned by
others, that usually leads to hurrying to do new functionality rather
than making sure what's done is done as well as they can. The nuisance
of working in a messy code base also contributes to the sense that they
need to hurry, since things take longer than imagined.
You may not have this problem, but I urge you to keep an eye open for it.
Also, if you're not trying to observe the sprint boundaries, why not
switch to a kanban approach? You can keep your current cadences for
planning, demonstrating, and retrospecting. The difference would be
that, instead of using getting things accomplished within the sprint
boundaries to limit WIP (which you're apparently not doing), you'd
explicitly limit WIP.
Just some thoughts to consider.
- George
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Michael Wollin
[SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
Post by Cass Dalton ***@gmail.com [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]
I am advising my clients to stop prefetching stores that they know
they can’t complete in the current sprint. They argue that they are
idle anyway. I argue that they should find something else to do like
read, innovate, speed up the build, add new tests, or play ping
pong. Part of the problem is their stories are too big and we are
addressing that. But I’d like some eloquence around as many
supporting arguments as I can develop. Suggestions?
Michael
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
--
----------------------------------------------------------
* George Dinwiddie * http://blog.gdinwiddie.com
Software Development http://www.idiacomputing.com
Consultant and Coach http://www.agilemaryland.org
----------------------------------------------------------
Loading...