Comments on: Scott Ambler on Agile http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler Scrum Coaching and Training Services Mon, 26 Apr 2010 06:13:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Festpreisprojekte und Scrum | ArmerKater.de - Scrum, Agiles Projektmanagement, Agile Nearshoring, Innovation und Organisation http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-130 Festpreisprojekte und Scrum | ArmerKater.de - Scrum, Agiles Projektmanagement, Agile Nearshoring, Innovation und Organisation Fri, 11 Dec 2009 06:04:17 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-130 [...] Ambler beispielsweise bezeichnet Festpreis-Projekte als grundsätzlich unethisch: Fixed price work is unethical. As wannabe [...] [...] Ambler beispielsweise bezeichnet Festpreis-Projekte als grundsätzlich unethisch: Fixed price work is unethical. As wannabe [...]

]]> By: Ambler, Hundermark and now my Two Cents | f3yourmind http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-58 Ambler, Hundermark and now my Two Cents | f3yourmind Fri, 08 May 2009 11:06:36 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-58 [...] Scott Ambler did in Cape Town a few weeks ago.  And Scott had the courtesy of straightening out some thoughts on Peter’s blog as [...] [...] Scott Ambler did in Cape Town a few weeks ago.  And Scott had the courtesy of straightening out some thoughts on Peter’s blog as [...]

]]> By: Paul Laberge http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-56 Paul Laberge Mon, 04 May 2009 10:26:10 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-56 Scott, Aren't you generalizing a bit too much? This kind of comparison against an organization with no improvement program, therefore development practices that lack efficiency, seems a bit amateurish. A best practice is a best practice for any development type. BTW, The terms 'traditional development' seems a bit vague, doesn't it? But then again, so does the word 'Agile'. Scott,

Aren’t you generalizing a bit too much? This kind of comparison against an organization with no improvement program, therefore development practices that lack efficiency, seems a bit amateurish. A best practice is a best practice for any development type. BTW, The terms ‘traditional development’ seems a bit vague, doesn’t it? But then again, so does the word ‘Agile’.

]]> By: Scott Ambler http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-53 Scott Ambler Fri, 01 May 2009 17:47:04 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-53 Looks like a pretty good summary, although there's a few miscommunications: 1. Software development is mostly an art, but there is some science involved. 2. There's a lot of lying going on with traditional approaches to project management -- they'll often pad estimates, go into a project knowing that they'll most likely have to cut scope or ask for more time & money regardless of what they committed to, will force a "change prevention" strategy on stakeholders, and so on. This stuff has been going on for so long many PMs think that it's best practice. 3. Traditional projects don't produce real value until the end of the project, agile ones do it throughout (huge difference). 4. Project post-mortems don't work well because people aren't motivated to change their behavior after the project has ended. Retrospective throughout the project can work very well. 5. "Change management" on traditional projects is a euphenism for change prevention. 6. The DDJ 2007 Agile Adoption survey looked at 19 different artifacts. The most valuable to agile teams in that survey was working software and source code (it was a tie) and the least valueable detailed gantt charts. There may be other less valuable artifacts that we didn't ask about. 7. The payback from moving from being near located to co-located will vary based on the situation. I was recently in one or where it payed off in a week, but YMMV. 8. Distribution results in a lower levels of trust because you don't know the people as well as the people you interact with directly on a regular basis. 9. Lean's "optimizing the whole" is an important consideration for making agile work effectively. Just because you think you're doing agile doesn't mean that you're optimizing the whole. 10. Google the term "BRUF" to find an article about the wastage resulting from doing detailed up front requirements. 11. Doing fixed-price, up front estimates is often a form of gambling, particularly on traditional projects. 12. Fixed price approaches are unethical for IT practitioners if they don't communicate the implications of the approach and provide viable alternatives. Google the term "fixed price unethical" for an article that I wrote on the subject. Looks like a pretty good summary, although there’s a few miscommunications:
1. Software development is mostly an art, but there is some science involved.
2. There’s a lot of lying going on with traditional approaches to project management — they’ll often pad estimates, go into a project knowing that they’ll most likely have to cut scope or ask for more time & money regardless of what they committed to, will force a “change prevention” strategy on stakeholders, and so on. This stuff has been going on for so long many PMs think that it’s best practice.
3. Traditional projects don’t produce real value until the end of the project, agile ones do it throughout (huge difference).
4. Project post-mortems don’t work well because people aren’t motivated to change their behavior after the project has ended. Retrospective throughout the project can work very well.
5. “Change management” on traditional projects is a euphenism for change prevention.
6. The DDJ 2007 Agile Adoption survey looked at 19 different artifacts. The most valuable to agile teams in that survey was working software and source code (it was a tie) and the least valueable detailed gantt charts. There may be other less valuable artifacts that we didn’t ask about.
7. The payback from moving from being near located to co-located will vary based on the situation. I was recently in one or where it payed off in a week, but YMMV.
8. Distribution results in a lower levels of trust because you don’t know the people as well as the people you interact with directly on a regular basis.
9. Lean’s “optimizing the whole” is an important consideration for making agile work effectively. Just because you think you’re doing agile doesn’t mean that you’re optimizing the whole.
10. Google the term “BRUF” to find an article about the wastage resulting from doing detailed up front requirements.
11. Doing fixed-price, up front estimates is often a form of gambling, particularly on traditional projects.
12. Fixed price approaches are unethical for IT practitioners if they don’t communicate the implications of the approach and provide viable alternatives. Google the term “fixed price unethical” for an article that I wrote on the subject.

]]> By: Richard Bailey http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-50 Richard Bailey Wed, 29 Apr 2009 10:53:12 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-50 I attended Scott's talk in Cape Town and I thought he had an excellent way of summarising the call to arms for Agile in general. Your summary of what he says about the "lies" we have been saddled with in software development are very true. We have to stop lying to our stake-holders about expectation and agile addresses that in many ways. I thought his approach to scaling agile was very mature - start somewhere small and grow. Being quite new to Scrum, I was not particuarly defensive, but I thought his comments on Scrum were insightful and pragmatic - it is a piece of the Agile puzzle, not the silver bullet. I attended Scott’s talk in Cape Town and I thought he had an excellent way of summarising the call to arms for Agile in general. Your summary of what he says about the “lies” we have been saddled with in software development are very true.
We have to stop lying to our stake-holders about expectation and agile addresses that in many ways.
I thought his approach to scaling agile was very mature – start somewhere small and grow.
Being quite new to Scrum, I was not particuarly defensive, but I thought his comments on Scrum were insightful and pragmatic – it is a piece of the Agile puzzle, not the silver bullet.

]]> By: Perlen von Scott oder: Scott Ambler on Agile | ArmerKater.de - Scrum, Agiles Projektmanagement, Innovation und Organisation http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-42 Perlen von Scott oder: Scott Ambler on Agile | ArmerKater.de - Scrum, Agiles Projektmanagement, Innovation und Organisation Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:35:50 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-42 [...] Scott Ambler on Agile. [...] [...] Scott Ambler on Agile. [...]

]]> By: Kevin Trethewey http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-39 Kevin Trethewey Wed, 08 Apr 2009 06:23:11 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-39 I also went to his talk (in JHB) with a fairly defensive mindset, even feeling the need to prep some of the people I knew were going to be there not to take him at face value (pro vendor, anti true agile). I was also mostly pleasantly surprised - in person and in context he is not nearly as confrontational and petulant as he has come across in the audio I have heard him in previously. The swipes he took at SCRUM were fairly valid IMHO - specifically that you can't become a master of anything in a two day course*. I did find the constant ibm/rup salesmanship a little disingenuous though and felt it shook his credibility badly. * Having attended your CSM course I found excellent and chock full of real value, but certainly wouldn't call myself a MASTER scrum master afterwards. I also went to his talk (in JHB) with a fairly defensive mindset, even feeling the need to prep some of the people I knew were going to be there not to take him at face value (pro vendor, anti true agile).

I was also mostly pleasantly surprised – in person and in context he is not nearly as confrontational and petulant as he has come across in the audio I have heard him in previously.

The swipes he took at SCRUM were fairly valid IMHO – specifically that you can’t become a master of anything in a two day course*.

I did find the constant ibm/rup salesmanship a little disingenuous though and felt it shook his credibility badly.

* Having attended your CSM course I found excellent and chock full of real value, but certainly wouldn’t call myself a MASTER scrum master afterwards.

]]> By: Scott Ambler in South Africa « Scrum 4 You http://www.scrumsense.com/coaching/scott-ambler/comment-page-1#comment-38 Scott Ambler in South Africa « Scrum 4 You Sat, 04 Apr 2009 07:03:48 +0000 http://www.scrumsense.com/?p=299#comment-38 [...] 4 April , 2009 · No Comments Peter Hundermark about Scott Amblers talk in South Africa. [...] [...] 4 April , 2009 · No Comments Peter Hundermark about Scott Amblers talk in South Africa. [...]

]]>