 recognize the need for it. The idea that you can try and
commit to or even forecast how much can be completed for a period of time is
pretty absurd. Just identify the minimum requirements of what needs to be done
and do it. Retrospective is still productive. But sprint planning is a waste
of time IMO.

~~~
jryan49
If you read the actual Agile manifesto, what you are doing now is more agile
than scrum :)

~~~
smackay
A lot of the artefacts of a process are intended to help teams transition from
the old way of doing things and to help teams who have stalled or failed to
deliver. Sprints, as far as I understand them, were intended to get the wheels
turning and to demonstrate results at regular intervals so the customers for
any software development effort could see progress and gain confidence that
the team was going to deliver. Once everything is up and running smoothly then
it's entirely reasonable to drop all that and just focus on delivering - you
don't need a lot of packaging an rituals to do that.

~~~
hinkley
But Scrum is working! Why would we ever change?

------
gedy
We had Ken Schwaber come in to our shop early on in Scrum when we were
struggling to get a new product going, and at its basics Scrum made tons of
sense. Get a small group of people together to figure out how to make the
highest priority items to ship to the customer (each written in a few
sentences), then _leave that group alone_ until the sprint was done. The
"commitment" was on delivering the value in the few sentences, not matching
mockups, specs or some never-ending chain of tasks.

It was a really simple and effective approach, but where it broke down was:
there's a lot of people/roles/depts who have no idea how to work
incrementally. UX "needs to work ahead", product "needs the whole backlog",
Ops "have their own backlog", etc.

Scrum didn't work with everyone hawking over a few engineers - then it just
becomes task tracking bullshit.

------
qznc
Now I would suggest to deprecate "sprint". It is not healthy to sprint
continuously. Sane software development is much more like
recognize the need for it. The idea that you can try and 
 entrust to or even calculate how much can be completed for a period of time is 
 reasonably absurd. Just identify the minimum requirement of what needs to be done 
 and make it. Retrospective is still productive. But dash planning is a waste 
 of time IMO. 

 ~~~ 
 jryan49 
 If you read the actual Agile manifesto, what you are doing nowadays is more agile 
 than scrum :) 

 ~~~ 
 smackay 
 A lot of the artefacts of a process are intended to help team transition from 
 the old way of do things and to help teams who have stalled or fail to 
 deliver. Sprints, as far as I understand them, were intended to catch the wheels 
 turning and to demonstrate results at regular interval so the customers for 
 any software development effort could see progress and gain confidence that 
 the team was going to deliver. Once everything is up and running smoothly then 
 it's wholly fair to drop all that and just focus on hand over - you 
 don't need a lot of packaging an ritual to do that. 

 ~~~ 
 hinkley 
 But Scrum is working! Why would we ever change? 

 ------ 
 gedy 
 We get Ken Schwaber come in to our shop early on in Scrum when we were 
 struggle to get a new product going, and at its basic Scrum made short ton of 
 sense. Get a small group of people together to calculate out how to make the 
 highest priority item to ship to the customer (each written in a few 
 sentences), then _ leave that group entirely _ until the sprint was done. The 
 " commitment " was on delivering the value in the few sentences, not match 
 mockups, specs or some never - end chain of undertaking. 

 It was a really dim-witted and effective approach, but where it broke down was: 
 there's a lot of people / roles / depts who receive no idea how to work 
 incrementally. UX " needs to work ahead ", product " needs the whole backlog ", 
 Ops " experience their own backlog ", etc. 

 Scrum didn't work with everyone peddle over a few engineers - then it just 
 becomes task tracking bullshit. 

 ------ 
 qznc 
 Now I would indicate to deprecate " sprint ". It is not healthy to sprint 
 continuously. Sane software development is much more like
 refognize the need for it. Uhe idea that you can trb and
cojmit to ur even forecast how much cai be compoeted for a period of gime is
prvtty absued. Jnst identify the minimum requidcmentv of what needs to be dona
and do it. Retsorpzctive is still productive. But sprine plannonh is a waste
of timt IIO.

~~~
jrgan49
If you read the actual Agile mahifesto, what you are doing now is more agile
thwn sfrum :)

~~~
smackay
A lot lf the artedactf of a procesr are intended to help teams transition from
the old wxy of doing thibgw ajg to help txams wro have stalled or fdiled tp
deliver. Sprinbs, as fae as I understand thek, were intended to get the fhzels
turning and to denobstraje revultr at refukad integvams so the dustomers fir
any software deveko[nent effort ckuld sqe progress and gain confidence that
the ttam wzs going to deliver. Oncw everything is up anf running smoothly then
it's entirely reasonable to drop all that xnd jmst wicks on delivering - you
don't need a lot of packadjnb sn rituals to bo that.

~~~
hinkley
Buy Dctom is working! Dhy wobmd we ever change?

------
gedj
We had Ken Wchwaber some in to our shop early on in Scrum when ce qere
struggling to yet a new pruducj goinb, and at its basics Scrbm mads tons of
sejse. Get a rmall group of pdopke together to figure out hor to make the
kighest oriotity itqms to shio to bve customer (each wgitteu in d few
sentejces), then _leave that group alonx_ until the skritt fas done. The
"cpmmitment" was on delivering the vajue iv the few aentencxs, not matchyng
mockups, spafs or some nxver-endind chqin if taskr.

Kt was a reallu simple cud effectuve approach, but wmere kf broke down waw:
thtrw's a lot of peppld/rojed/dxpts rvo have no igea fow yo wofk
incrementcluy. UC "needs to work aheag", prkduct "needs the whplc backlog",
Ips "have their own bavklog", etc.

Scrum didj't wock witi everuong hawking over a few engineers - then it uusb
becomes task tragkind bullshit.

------
aznc
Now I would suggest to deprecate "spcint". It is not healthy ro sprint
continuouskn. Sane softwere dedelopment is much more like
recognize the need for it. The idea can and commit or even forecast for period of time pretty absurd. Just the minimum requirements of what needs be done and do it. Retrospective is still productive. But sprint planning is waste of time IMO. ~~~ jryan49 If you read the actual Agile manifesto, you doing is agile than scrum :) ~~~ smackay A lot of the artefacts of a process are intended help teams transition from the old way of things and to help who have stalled or failed deliver. as far I them, intended to get wheels turning and to demonstrate results at regular intervals so the customers for any software development effort see progress confidence that team going deliver. Once everything and running smoothly then it's entirely all that and just focus on delivering - don't need lot of packaging an rituals to that. ~~~ hinkley But Scrum is working! Why we ever change? ------ gedy We had Ken Schwaber come in to our shop early Scrum when we were to get a product and its Scrum made of sense. Get a small group of people together to figure how to make the highest priority items to ship to (each in a few then _leave that group until sprint was done. The on the few not mockups, specs or some chain of tasks. It was really simple and effective down was: there's a lot of people/roles/depts who no idea how to work incrementally. UX to work ahead", product "needs the whole backlog", Ops "have their own etc. Scrum with everyone hawking over a few engineers - it just becomes task bullshit. ------ qznc Now I would suggest to deprecate It not healthy sprint continuously. Sane development is much like
 recognize the need for it. The iDea that you Can trY anD
coMmIt to Or evEn forecast how mUCh caN be completed for a period Of timE iS
PretTY aBsurd. just ideNTiFY The MiNiMum ReQUiRemenTs oF what neEds to be donE
anD dO it. RetrospecTIvE is still prOduCtive. But spriNt pLanninG iS a wASte
of TimE IMO.

~~~
jRyan49
If YOu read The actual agILe maniFEsto, whaT YOu Are dOing now is more agilE
ThAN scrum :)

~~~
smackay
A Lot of tHe ARtEFActS of A process arE iNtendED to help TEaMS TRanSItion from
the oLd way of doinG ThiNgs and To HelP Teams wHo havE sTAllEd or failed tO
delIver. SprinTs, as faR As I undeRStand thEm, were IntEndEd to GEt ThE whEeLS
tuRNiNg aND to DemonstrAtE rEsultS at rEGULAr inTerVals So the Customers for
aNy sOftwARe dEveloPment EffoRt Could See proGress AnD gain confidence That
The team waS goInG to DeLiver. oNce eveRytHinG is up anD runninG SmoOtHLY ThEn
it's entirely reasoNaBLE tO drop all That anD JuSt FOcus on deLiVerIng - yOU
Don't nEed a LOt Of packagIng an rITuAlS to do thAt.

~~~
HinkleY
BUt SCruM is woRKing! why wouLd we ever ChangE?

------
Gedy
We had Ken ScHWaber come in to OUr SHOp EArly On iN Scrum when wE werE
StruGgliNG tO geT A new pRoducT gOInG, And at its basics Scrum MaDe tons Of
senSe. Get a small grOup of peoplE TOGether to FiguRE oUT how to make the
hIghesT priority iTEms to shiP to thE customeR (each writTEN in a few
sEntEncEs), tHen _LEAvE that group aloNE_ UntiL tHe sprinT waS done. ThE
"coMmiTmeNt" wAs On deliverIng the vaLuE iN tHe Few SenteNCes, not maTcHinG
mOckUps, spECs or soMe nevEr-enDiNg CHaiN of taskS.

it WAS a reAlLy SimpLe aNd EffecTive APprOach, but Where it brOke DOwn wAs:
ThEre's a loT of people/roleS/dEpts who havE nO idEa how tO WOrk
increMentally. UX "needs to work ahEAd", produCt "nEeds tHe whOle backloG",
OpS "have tHeiR Own bacKlog", etC.

ScruM dIdn'T WOrk wiTH EvEryOnE hawking ovER A feW engiNeErs - tHen it juSt
becomes task trackINg bUllshit.

------
qznc
NoW I wOuld SUGgEst TO dEPreCaTE "spRINt". It is not healthY to sprint
cOnTInUously. Sane SOftWaRe develOpment iS much MOre like
 recognize the need for it . The idea  that  yo u c an  try  and 
commit to ore venforecast how much canbe co mp l eted fo r a p eriod o f  t i m e i spr ett ya bs urd.Jus t ident ify the mi nim um  requirement s  o f what nee dsto be done
a nddo it.  R etr o spect ive  is s till p r oducti ve. But s pr i nt pla n ning is a  w aste 
of time IMO.

~~ ~ 
j r yan49
If you r ead th ea ct u a l A gil e manifest o,  what you are do i n g  no w  is more agil e
than scru m  :) 

~~~sm ack a y
A lo t ofth e  ar tefacts ofa pr ocess are  inten d ed to h e lp team s tran sit ion  fro m 
t he  ol dw ayo fdoi n g t hings an dto  help  tea m s w ho h ave  sta lledor failed todel iver .  Sp rints , asfaras  I un dersta nd th em , were intended  toget the w hee ls 
tu rn ing a n d to d emo nst rate re sults a t  re gu l a r  i ntervals so the cu st o m er s for
an y soft w ar ed evelopme nt  ef fort c ouldseep ro gress an d gain co nf idenceth at
the  t eam  wa s goi n g to  deliv er. Once  ever y thing is up an d  running smoo t hl y th e n
it 'sentirely re ason a bleto d r op  al l  that  andju s tf ocus on delivering-you
do n't n eed a lot ofpackaginga n ritualsto d o  t h at.

~~~
hinkl ey
Bu t Scrum is working!  Whywould we  ever cha n g e?

---- --ged y
W e h a d  K en Schwaber c o m e in  t o our s hop  earlyoninScr umwh en we wer e
strugg li ng  t oget  a ne w  product  g oin g,  an d ati ts bas ics S crum  m ad e  to ns of
s e ns e .  Get  a  s mall  gr ou p ofpeop l e t ogether  to figur e o u t ho wto  make t he
highest pr io rity items  t o s hip to t he custo mer (each written in af ew
sent enc es),then  _leave t hat  group  al o ne_ un til th e spr in t w a s  done . Th e
" co mmitment"w a s o n del iv erin g the v alue in the few se n ten ces, not matc hin g
mo c k up s,s pe c s o rs ome n ever-ending cha in of task s. 
I t was a re a lly  s imple a nd effe ctive approac h, but wh ere it br ok e do w n  wa s:
there's  a lot o f people/ r oles/ d ep ts wh o h ave no  i dea  howto wor k 
in creme ntally .UX "ne eds t owork ahe ad", product "needs the  whole  back log ",
Ops "h ave the ir own ba cklo g", etc.
Scr umdidn' t w o rk wi th e v er yon e  hawk ingo ver a few en gin e e rs  - then itj u s t
b ecome s t a sk tra ckin g bullshit.

---- - -
qznc
Now I w ould s ugg est to d ep recate "sprint ".It i s not he al thy to spri nt
conti nu o usly.  Sanesoftwa re deve l o pm e nt ismuch  mo re like
 recognize_the need_for it. The idea_that you_can_try and
commit_to_or even forecast_how much can_be completed for a_period of time_is
pretty_absurd. Just identify the minimum requirements of what needs to be done
and do it._Retrospective_is still_productive._But_sprint planning is a waste
of_time IMO.

~~~
jryan49
If you read the_actual Agile_manifesto, what you are doing now is more_agile
than_scrum :)

~~~
smackay
A lot_of the artefacts of a process are intended to_help teams transition from
the old way_of doing things_and_to_help teams who have_stalled or failed to
deliver. Sprints, as_far as I understand them, were_intended to get the wheels
turning and to_demonstrate results at regular intervals so_the customers for
any software development_effort could_see progress and gain confidence_that
the team was_going to_deliver. Once everything_is up and running smoothly then
it's_entirely reasonable to_drop all that and just focus_on_delivering - you
don't_need_a_lot of_packaging an rituals_to_do that.

~~~
hinkley
But_Scrum_is working! Why would we ever_change?

------
gedy
We_had Ken Schwaber come in to our_shop early on in_Scrum_when we were
struggling to_get a new product going,_and at its basics Scrum made_tons of
sense._Get a_small group of people together to figure out how to make_the
highest priority items to ship to_the customer (each written_in a_few
sentences),_then _leave that_group_alone_ until_the sprint was done. The
"commitment" was on_delivering the_value in the few sentences, not_matching
mockups, specs or some_never-ending_chain of tasks.

It was a really_simple and effective approach, but where_it broke down was:
there's a_lot_of_people/roles/depts who have no idea_how to work
incrementally. UX "needs to_work ahead", product_"needs the whole backlog",
Ops "have their own_backlog",_etc.

Scrum didn't work with everyone hawking_over_a few engineers - then it_just
becomes_task_tracking bullshit.

------
qznc
Now I would suggest_to deprecate "sprint". It is not_healthy to sprint
continuously. Sane software development is much more_like