D.S

langrsoft.com

Langr Software Solutions » daily stand-ups

Langr Software Solutions » daily stand-ups — Main Menu — Home Consulting / Coaching Training - Information About Training - Student Quotes - Technical Training - Process Training Resources - Agile in a Flash blog - Articles - Jeff’s Wiselike Page (Q&A!) - Books Jeff’s Blog About Home Consulting / Coaching Training Information About Training Student Quotes Technical Training Process Training Resources Agile in a Flash blog Articles Jeff’s Wiselike Page (Q&A!) Books Jeff’s Blog About How’s Your Daily Standup Working for You? July 19, 2012 by jlangr collaboration 0 Comment needing the walls to stand! I posted a response to a blog post entitled “ Why I hate SCRUM daily standup meetings ,” but it’s still awaiting moderation after a couple days. I’m impatient, so here’s my comment: ====== From: @jlangr ====== “On top of this, they need to setup a meeting to learn what my collegues are working on feels so wrong to me.” Agreed. If you are a good team that already finds ways to get together and talk about what’s important, a formal meeting is a waste of time. Sitting in a common area where this can happen throughout the day can make it even less useful. Having said that, it’s great starter discipline, and can be useful in environments where it’s not easy to get people together (I’ve been in places where I wasted way too much time trying to track people down or when my attempts to discuss things were rebuffed by people who were “too busy”). I’d start a new team on daily standups, but would push the team to find ways to eliminate the need for them once they got better at working together. Also, most shops that run daily scrums and don’t get much out of them aren’t collaborating enough. It becomes one person reporting status, while the others worry about what they’re going to say when it’s their turn (because “that stuff” has little to do with what they’re doing). If that’s the case, you may as well revert to people sending an email with their status to the project manager, who gathers and emails a summary of what’s important to the team. But…that’s not what works best in agile (or lean). See Stories and the Tedium of Daily Standups : What works best is real collaboration, which in turn makes the stand-ups far more useful and engaging. There’s also an Agile in a Flash card for that ! I’d love to hear more positive stories about stand-ups, given that most of the time I hear from people who’ve learned to detest them. Good or bad, how’s your stand-up meeting working for you? Pigs, Chickens, and Asses September 15, 2008 by Jeff Langr 0 Comment In Scrum, those “not accountable for deliverables” (emphasis added; see Jeff Sutherland’s article ) do not get to talk during certain meetings. Pigs (product owners, ScrumMasters, and “the team”) are accountable for the success of the project. Everyone else is a chicken, because they’re not accountable for the project. Their opinions are distracting and thus damaging to the project. Thus customers–people who ask for and pay for the product–are not part of the team, nor are the people who manage humans on the team. In Scrum, these people are absolutely not part of what we’re trying to accomplish, and they are to be silenced during parts of the development process. Of course I understand why the rule exists. There’s always a loquacious manager or sponsor who wants to hear their own voice, or worse, insist that the team work “their” way. Understandably, we should want to minimize such distractions. Unfortunately, the remedy goes too far, substituting command and control for the core agile value of communication. The rule is borne out of excessive personal bias: In the above-linked blog post, Sutherland says, “Whatever we call them it should have a negative connotation because they tend to sap productivity. They are really suckers or parasites that live off the work of others.” Gee, how do you really feel? Some distaste between management and development is normal, but this stance isn’t at all helpful. Knowing that deeply caustic bile is part of the foundation of pigs and chickens only affirms my belief that it’s a damaging practice. XP embraces the wonderful value of courage. The simple XP solution would seem to be: Ask the disruptive people to stop. Talk about it. If you can’t figure out how to do that, you have more serious problems that a contrived rule is not going to solve. People are not chickens. Calling them such is demeaning, even if you have a cute, cloying story to back up your attempts to control. A simple statement or two can make things clear: “This meeting is intended to help ensure continual progress on our commitments to delivery. Discussions around that are welcome, no matter who you are. Attempts to be a back-seat driver should be taken offline to our Scrum Master ™. We’ll let you know if you’re detracting from our goals.” Ultimately, it should be obvious that any rule that silences a whole class of people is not in the spirit of agile. We should welcome contributions