Skip to main content

Agile 42 at the Scrum Gathering

It was great to get together last week with old friends and colleagues Alex Aptus and Andrea Tomasini, who were over in London for the Scrum Gathering 2007. They are both doing Scrum consulting and training in Germany. Andrea's company is called Agile42 and if you think about it the name has some logic to it - "agile" is the undisputed answer to all the major questions of software engineering (mmm...?) in the same way that 42 is the answer to that only slightly larger chestnut: life, the universe and everything. Actually I'd recommend Alex and Andrea's work precisely because they understand that the answers to large questions are not trite or formulaic. If you manage to engage them for your project you'll not only get excellent training in standard methods but thoughtful and experienced consultants that will help you solve the hard questions too.

Another highlight of our meeting was seeing the newly opened St Pancras station on the day that the first Eurostar train arrived there from Paris. The queues at Europe's longest champagne bar meant that we weren't able to order their most expensive bottle at (literally) £2800 a pop!

By the way Andrea has a blog on Software Development Process in Practice. Why not check it out. He has a thoughtful article for example on requirements management. Here's the link: Software Development Process in Practice: Agile Product Development... How to manage Requirements? Effective requirements management has been shown time and again to be the most crucial aspect of successful projects so it's a worthy topic for discussion. I think it's an area that all of us involved with agile processes should be examining. My feeling is that agile methods stop too readily at the level of "features" without also trying to capture other aspects of requirements. 3 Types of Requirement tries to explain this - it summarises the results of some consulting in this area for a client adopting agile methods on very large projects.
1 comment

Popular posts from this blog

Does your Definition of Done allow known defects?

Is it just me or do you also find it odd that some teams have clauses like this in their definition of done (DoD)?
... the Story will contain defects of level 3 severity or less only ... Of course they don't mean you have to put minor bugs in your code - that really would be mad - but it does mean you can sign the Story off as "Done"if the bugs you discover in it are only minor (like spelling mistakes, graphical misalignment, faults with easy workarounds, etc.). I saw DoDs like this some time ago and was seriously puzzled by the madness of it. I was reminded of it again at a meet-up discussion recently - it's clearly a practice that's not uncommon.

Let's look at the consequences of this policy. 

Potentially for every User Story that is signed off as "Done" there could be several additional Defect Stories (of low priority) that will be created. It's possible that finishing a Story (with no additional user requirements) will result in an increase in…

"Plan of Intent" and "Plan of Record"

Ron Lichty is well known in the Software Engineering community on the West Coast as a practitioner, as a seasoned project manager of many successful ventures and in a number of SIGs and conferences in which he is active. In spite of knowing Ron by correspondence over a long period of time it was only at JavaOne this year that we finally got together and I'm very glad we did.

Ron wrote to me after our meeting:

I told a number of people later at JavaOne, and even later that evening at the Software Engineering Management SIG, about xProcess. It really looks good. A question came up: It's a common technique in large organizations to keep a "Plan of Intent" and a "Plan of Record" - to have two project plans, one for the business partners and boss, one you actually execute to. Any support for that in xProcess?

Good question! Here's my reply...

There is support in xProcess for an arbitrary number of target levels through what we call (in the process definitions) P…

Understanding Cost of Delay and its Use in Kanban

Cost of Delay (CoD) is a vital concept to understand in product development. It should be a guide to the ordering of work items, even if - as is often the case - estimating it quantitatively may be difficult or even impossible. Analysing Cost of Delay (even if done qualitatively) is important because it focuses on the business value of work items and how that value changes over time. An understanding of Cost of Delay is essential if you want to maximise the flow of value to your customers.

Don Reinertsen in his book Flow [1] has shown that, if you want to deliver the maximum business value with a given size team, you give the highest priority, not to the most valuable work items in your "pool of ideas," not even to the most urgent items (those whose business value decays at the fastest rate), nor to your smallest items. Rather you should prioritise those items with the highest value of urgency (or CoD) divided by the time taken to implement them. Reinertsen called this appro…