About SA mission

[Joshua Partogi]

Hi,

I am pondering about SA's mission, that is transform the world of work. Does this mean SA 's mission is transforming the world of work regardless that is a software company or not? Does that mean SA try to apply scrum generically? If the answer to both questions is yes, then SA should reflect that mission in the trainings delivered in classes and in questions asked in the certifications. Otherwise thr mission will be very vague.

--
@jpartogi

[Nigel Baker]

Scrum beyond software is a long term goal that many Scrummy people are
pursuing. It is still a work in progress.

At many gatherings there are streams supporting this goal. At the
London Gathering where I was Chairman, we had presentations on using
Scrum in Education. I personally have worked with teams using Scrum in
HR and marketing.

Regards,

Nigel

[John Miller - Agile Schools]

Yes! It should to transform the world and develop creative, empowered
citizens in every area. It values people as creative beings capable of
changing the world, with a framework to actually operationalize these
values in their day to day work and lives, while delivering more
effective solutions.

Agile is much more than software. In, fact, I have helped 2 schools
use Scrum in the classroom and their teacher teams. It has been
amazing. I have taught about 5 school Districts Scrum (volunteered, so
I am not trying to make money on this), which they are just starting
to use, so, I can't say that is successful yet. I work in education
and am a SCM, SCPO, PMP, and saw how well Scrum would work in schools
right away.
I just posted a question about this to the group, so, I hope you
respond.
You can see some of this on my blog:

Scrum in the Classroom http://theagileschool.blogspot.com/2012/01/scrum-in-classroom.html
Extreme 21st Century Learning (serves as the basis and reasoning why
schools need Scrum): http://theagileschool.blogspot.com/2012/02/over-rainbow-to-extreme-21st-century.html

Thanks,
John Miller

[Joshua Partogi]

Hi Nigel,

Is there any roadmap for this goal? I want to know when this mission will be reflected in the certification and training courses.

Thanks.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Scrum Alliance - transforming the world of work." group.
To post to this group, send email to scruma...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to scrumallianc...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/scrumalliance?hl=en.

--
@jpartogi

[Joshua Partogi]

Hi John,

I agree with you that Agile is much more than software. Should the Agile Manifesto be revised to reflect that Agile is much more than software?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Scrum Alliance - transforming the world of work." group.
To post to this group, send email to scruma...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to scrumallianc...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/scrumalliance?hl=en.

--
@jpartogi

[Tim Korson]

I do a lot of Scrum training. In all of my Scrum courses, I have
replaced the word "software" with the generic term "Product." So we
talk about Scrum as a product development framework, not just a
software development framework.

Jim Coplien and I co-taught a CSM course at TREK Bicycles. It would be
interesting to follow up and see how Scrum is faring as a bicycle
development framework.

So it is happening - but here and there - and perhaps more slowly that
we would like - but it is happening.

[AgileSchools]

I agree! I just had a conversation with Integrum about how Agile has evolved way beyond software and the manifesto should be revised. 

I am helping an entire school go Agile (Scrum), from student learning, school leadership, and teacher teams with surprisingly amazing results. 

The software language is a barrier to faster adoption. 

We should pay homage to the roots of Agile, but, the roots should not hold it back. I use it for my IT Dept for all operations, and we do absolutely no software dev. 

I will be facilitating a session at the SA Atlanta Gathering in May about Scrum in Schools and I hope to have some good discussions on "Is Agile for non software products Agile?". 

I say yes! It time to inspect and adapt the Manifesto to empower people and make a better society. 

[RonJeffries]

Hi Joshua,

On Mar 20, 2012, at 9:53 PM, Joshua Partogi wrote:

I agree with you that Agile is much more than software. Should the Agile Manifesto be revised to reflect that Agile is much more than software?

No. It should no more be revised than should today's report on yesterday's weather, for the same reason.

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

Sometimes I give myself admirable advice, but I am incapable of taking it.

-- Mary Wortley Montagu

[RonJeffries]

Hello, Schools, if that is in fact your name,

On Mar 20, 2012, at 10:15 PM, AgileSchools wrote:

I agree! I just had a conversation with Integrum about how Agile has evolved way beyond software and the manifesto should be revised. 

I am helping an entire school go Agile (Scrum), from student learning, school leadership, and teacher teams with surprisingly amazing results. 

The software language is a barrier to faster adoption. 

We should pay homage to the roots of Agile, but, the roots should not hold it back. I use it for my IT Dept for all operations, and we do absolutely no software dev. 

I will be facilitating a session at the SA Atlanta Gathering in May about Scrum in Schools and I hope to have some good discussions on "Is Agile for non software products Agile?". 

I say yes! It time to inspect and adapt the Manifesto to empower people and make a better society. 

You mistake the nature of a manifesto. Of course more has been learned about the Agile ideas, and if they are useful outside software, that's great.

The manifesto, however, is the work of 17 people, reporting on their views, at that point in time.

You can write your own manifesto, if you're up to it. You can't rewrite someone else's.

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

 Before you contradict an old man, my fair friend, you should endeavor to understand him. - George Santayana

[AgileSchools]

Not sure how the google group records my name, I'll look into that, thanks for pointing that out. 

My name is John Miller. 

So, the manifesto only belongs to the individuals who created it? Not rhetorical, this is an honest question. 

If so, are those not open to feedback on how to grow their movement? Are those people who look to the manifesto for guidance forbidden to offer suggestions? Is that in the true spirit of Agile?

Anyone can create their own manifesto, for sure. Would it not be more powerful to have an overarching one that unites people rather than have a million forks from it? 

If I am using Scrum for non-software projects, is that still Agile?

Good discussion. 

[John Miller]

I think I have the start of an answer. If I understand the history correctly, Scrum, XP, etc existed before the Agile Manifesto. Agile was the label given after the fact for a family of frameworks and methodologies by the manifesto creators. 

So, perhaps all I can say is I do Scrum, but it is not Agile? 

Thoughts....

On Mar 20, 2012, at 8:18 PM, RonJeffries <ronje...@acm.org> wrote:

[RonJeffries]

Hi John,

On Mar 20, 2012, at 11:28 PM, AgileSchools wrote:

So, the manifesto only belongs to the individuals who created it? Not rhetorical, this is an honest question. 

The authors think the manifesto belongs to us as a statement, yes. A manifesto is a statement by a given set of people at a given moment in time. It is a weather report from back in 2001. 

The ideas, we gave freely to the world. The additions that other people make to those ideas in their own lives belong to them. We would like to feel a little pride of parenthood for the good results but we know that the good results people get are the result more of what those people do that of what we said.

If so, are those not open to feedback on how to grow their movement?

The movement is not the manifesto. The movement was going on before the manifesto and has gone on after it. The manifesto is just a statement of some shared values and principles.

Are those people who look to the manifesto for guidance forbidden to offer suggestions?

Of course people can offer suggestions. There are about a billion books, articles, web sites, blogs, and probably dance numbers about Agile. Those are all wonderful. We're happy about them and hope that we had a little to do with it. 

If we had been smarter back then, or better at facilitating a meeting, we might have written something even better, though this has gone pretty well. But no matter what we wrote, that's what we wrote.

I wouldn't let you rewrite my book. I welcome you learning from mine, and I welcome you writing your own book. The manifesto is a couple of pages of joint writing by 17 people. We're glad if you got something good out of it and we rejoice in what you make of it.

Is that in the true spirit of Agile?

Yes. Agile is not about revising the past, it is about building the now and building tomorrow.

We have all learned more, written more, and taught more since then. Hundreds of thousands of people have learned, written, and taught. Innumerable good ideas (and not so good ones) have grown out of what we started on those days long ago.

The manifesto isn't the definition of Agile, it is a statement of values and principles held by a few people a decade ago. 

The spirit of Agile is in what people have done with it, not in what we wrote back then. The future of Agile is in what people do with it tomorrow, not in what we wrote back then.

The manifesto is history. Agile is now.

Anyone can create their own manifesto, for sure. Would it not be more powerful to have an overarching one that unites people rather than have a million forks from it? 

No, because the manifesto is just a starting statement. Not that it's this important, but we don't go back and rewrite the Magna Carta. We go forward from it.

If I am using Scrum for non-software projects, is that still Agile?

I don't know. It depends on how closely you are following the values and principles we spoke of.

But that's not the important question. The point isn't to "be Agile". That probably doesn't even mean anything. The point is to be successful, and to live within those values and those principles and the many other values and principles it takes to be a good human being, and to be successful.

Agile, for you, is what you do tomorrow, not what 17 old guys did back in 2001.

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

Wisdom begins when we understand the difference between "that makes no sense" and "I don't understand". -- Mary Doria Russell

[John Miller]

Thank you, Ron. This gives me, and I am sure many others, a lot to think about and a great perspective.  

We do look at the Agile Manifesto for guidance by default. Would the original creators be open to develop, with others, a new weather report? It would really help strengthen the "movement". 

Too many Agile manifesto forks has its own set of issues. 

[Michael James]

John, if you were to develop an Agile Schools Manifesto, non-famous but concerned parents like me, and perhaps a couple famous people like some of the Agile Manifesto signers, would sign on to it.  While from the website I see Agile principles employed in what you're doing, I'm not 100% sure Agile is the right name for it.  But then I'm sure you've thought about this more than I have.

My guess as to why the Agile Manifesto has more resonance than (for example) the five Scrum values: a meaningful values declaration should value one thing over another valuable thing.  What thing currently considered valuable are we willing to give up to get the schools you envision?
 
--mj

(Michael)

[Kurt Häusler]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:46 AM, RonJeffries <ronje...@acm.org> wrote:
> The manifesto isn't the definition of Agile, it is a statement of values and
> principles held by a few people a decade ago.
>
> The spirit of Agile is in what people have done with it, not in what we
> wrote back then. The future of Agile is in what people do with it tomorrow,
> not in what we wrote back then.
>
> The manifesto is history. Agile is now.

Ok well I will have to change my view on things then. Up until now I
had been considering the Agile Manifesto and the Principles as the
maybe not definition, but foundation of Agile software development.

I find the values and principles just as relevant now as ever, and no
one has ever been prevented from developing new practices based on
those values and principles and calling them Agile practices. It is a
strength of the manifesto that the values are set in stone, and the
principles serve as fairly solid guidance, whereas little mention is
made of concrete practices, which allows plenty of room for growth.

I already see people trying to use it as a synonym for good, or apply
it as a marketing term for things that conflict with the values and
principles in the manifesto. If you aren't doing software development,
or wish to deviate from the values and principles in the manifesto,
but what you are doing is sort of culturally similar to the intent
behind the manifesto, then find another word. Find out what it is that
what you are doing has in common with Agile software development, and
find a new word to describe it to avoid confusion.

There might be an even more fundamental cultural basis or something
behind these values and principles that can be applied outside of
software, but to me it doesn't make sense to use the word Agile to
describe things that have nothing to do with software development,
(unless of course you are deliberately trying to hijack the momentum
of the Agile software development community, cause confusion, or you
genuinely intend to use the English word "agile" in its pre-manifesto
sense).

Once people start using it to mean anything they like, or things
outside of software, then it basically loses all meaning, unless of
course some authoritative figure comes out and says, "ok, Agile refers
to a certain culture characterized by the following attributes..." or
something.

How could we then define Agile? Does it really mean something that can
be applied outside of Software development?

(Note this is about the term Agile, with a capital A, used in the
title of the Agile Manifesto, commonly associated with developing
software. Not Scrum, people have been open about its applicability
outside software development. And not the English word agile, although
I feel people should really make more effort to distinguish when they
use the normal English word agile, and the term Agile as commonly used
in the software development field).

[Kurt Häusler]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:46 AM, RonJeffries <ronje...@acm.org> wrote:
>

> If I am using Scrum for non-software projects, is that still Agile?
>
>
> I don't know. It depends on how closely you are following the values and
> principles we spoke of.

Ahh hold on a minute. So the values and principles in the Agile
Manifesto are still the main deciding factor determining whether the
label "Agile" is appropriate or not.

That is ok, that is how I feel too.

And I also agree that it isn't that important to be "Agile" (but
rather to be effective etc), so I wonder why people outside the
software development field, or doing things outside the scope of (but
perhaps inspired by), or blatantly contrary to the values in the
manifesto, are so desperate to hijack the term?

[RonJeffries]

On Mar 20, 2012, at 11:44 PM, John Miller wrote:

I think I have the start of an answer. If I understand the history correctly, Scrum, XP, etc existed before the Agile Manifesto. Agile was the label given after the fact for a family of frameworks and methodologies by the manifesto creators. 

That is correct, yes.

So, perhaps all I can say is I do Scrum, but it is not Agile? 

Thoughts....

You can say you're doing Agile if you want to. It's bad syntax in my opinion, since Agile is an adjective, but people do say it.

You should be aware that a lot of people who say they are doing Agile or doing Scrum, really aren't, and it kind of rankles us but it's OK.

However, in my opinion, one can have better objectives than "being Agile" or "doing Scrum". Objectives like those of the business, for example. Doing Scrum, in my opinion, is a means, not an end. 

You just can't rewrite someone else's /manifesto/. You can write /a/ Scrum Guide: you just can't rewrite Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland's Scrum Guide. Same thing.

[RonJeffries]

On Mar 20, 2012, at 11:58 PM, John Miller wrote:

We do look at the Agile Manifesto for guidance by default. Would the original creators be open to develop, with others, a new weather report? It would really help strengthen the "movement". 

As a group? I doubt it. Would it be possible to get some of us? Maybe. Those of us who are in the business or avocation of influencing the world are doing it in other ways now. But who knows what might be caused to happen.

[RonJeffries]

Hi Kurt,

In what's below, it sounds to me that you are talking to John more than to me. I see no reason for you to change your view. Just one insert below:

On Mar 21, 2012, at 3:15 AM, Kurt Häusler wrote:

Ok well I will have to change my view on things then. Up until now I
had been considering the Agile Manifesto and the Principles as the
maybe not definition, but foundation of Agile software development.

Yes, foundation. Exactly.

I agree with everything below here rather well. :)

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

If another does not intend offense, it is wrong for me to seek it;

if another does indeed intend offense, it is foolish for me to permit it.

  -- Kelly Easterley

[RonJeffries]

Hi Kurt,

On Mar 21, 2012, at 3:20 AM, Kurt Häusler wrote:

And I also agree that it isn't that important to be "Agile" (but
rather to be effective etc), so I wonder why people outside the
software development field, or doing things outside the scope of (but
perhaps inspired by), or blatantly contrary to the values in the
manifesto, are so desperate to hijack the term?

They're appealing values. It's a cool term. Folks do it. It has been watered down to just about nothing.

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

I'm really pissed off by what people are passing off as "agile" these days.

You may have a red car, but that does not make it a Ferrari.

  -- Steve Hayes

[Pierre Neis]

My today's bloody questions:

• Is Scrum still only focused on Software Development?
• Shall we not focus on "Declaration of Interdepence" instead "Agile Manifesto"?

Pierre E. Neis Agile/Lean Coach, (available)  | Mobile: (+352) 661 727 867 http://meetwith.me/pierreneis

 

Owner of the "Product Owner's Help Desk"

Contact me: pierre.neis

Latest tweet: @flowchainsensei @talboomerik need to advert this to head hunters or.... train them Follow @elPedroMajor Reply Retweet   11:26 Mar-21

Save a tree - kill a beaver

Get a signature like this. CLICK HERE.  

[Kurt Häusler]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Pierre Neis <pierr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My today's bloody questions:
>
> Is Scrum still only focused on Software Development?

No. Scrum is applicable for product development and knowledge work of
many types.

"Scrum (n): A framework within which people can address complex
adaptive problems, while
productively and creatively delivering products of the highest
possible value." - Scrum Guide

> Shall we not focus on "Declaration of Interdepence" instead "Agile
> Manifesto"?

Well the Declaration of Interdepence looks pretty good, and the word
Software is nowhere mentioned. "Project Management" and "Project
leaders" is however mentioned, so I guess it's scope of relevance is
constrained to projects, and it is probably most useful at that level
of management. I also note that when the word agile is mentioned not
at the beginning of a sentence, they use a small a, so I assume they
are using the English word agile rather than capital A Agile that I as
a software developer sometimes presume.

Looks good, I agree with what it says. I can see for some people it is
the manifesto they are looking for rather than the Agile Manifesto for
software development.

[Pierre Neis]

@ Kurt

Is Scrum designed to manage projects? According that a Project is described as attending a single result and that a project is composed by 2 parts: a product and a process.

What's your position on this?

Pierre E. Neis Agile/Lean Coach, (available)  | Mobile: (+352) 661 727 867 http://meetwith.me/pierreneis

 

Owner of the "Product Owner's Help Desk"

Contact me: pierre.neis

Latest tweet: @flowchainsensei @talboomerik need to advert this to head hunters or.... train them Follow @elPedroMajor Reply Retweet   11:26 Mar-21

Save a tree - kill a beaver

Get a signature like this. CLICK HERE.  

[RonJeffries]

On Mar 21, 2012, at 6:44 AM, Pierre Neis wrote:

My today's bloody questions:

• Is Scrum still only focused on Software Development?

No, Scrum can be used for many things.

• Shall we not focus on "Declaration of Interdepence" instead "Agile Manifesto"?

Why not focus on improving one's own situation, rather than on words written a long time ago? That said the Manifesto has had more impact than the Declaration did. It was ... odd.

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

There's no word for accountability in Finnish. 

Accountability is something that is left when responsibility has been subtracted. 

--Pasi Sahlberg

[Joshua Partogi]

Maybe we should make "Agile Manifesto for non-software" rather than having an endless debate whether we should revise it or not. :-)

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:50 AM, RonJeffries <ronje...@acm.org> wrote:

On Mar 21, 2012, at 6:44 AM, Pierre Neis wrote:

My today's bloody questions:

• Is Scrum still only focused on Software Development?

No, Scrum can be used for many things.

• Shall we not focus on "Declaration of Interdepence" instead "Agile Manifesto"?

Why not focus on improving one's own situation, rather than on words written a long time ago? That said the Manifesto has had more impact than the Declaration did. It was ... odd.

 

--
@jpartogi

[Kurt Häusler]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Pierre Neis <pierr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> @ Kurt
>
> Is Scrum designed to manage projects? According that a Project is
> described as attending a single result and that a project is composed by 2
> parts: a product and a process.
>
> What's your position on this?

I don't know if it was explicitly designed for projects, but it seems
ideal for both projects as well as things that aren't structured as
projects.

[Pierre Neis]

This is also my POV.

When I start implementing Scrum, very often I start coaching Project Management and then Scrum, and then Agile .

A project manager who is stand alone and design an interface is an Interface Designer.

A project manager who doesn't manage the budget is a waiter.

A project manager who is planned the resources availabily is a Resource Manager.

Pierre E. Neis Agile/Lean Coach, (available)  | Mobile: (+352) 661 727 867 http://meetwith.me/pierreneis

 

Owner of the "Product Owner's Help Desk"

Contact me: pierre.neis

Latest tweet: @flowchainsensei @talboomerik need to advert this to head hunters or.... train them Follow @elPedroMajor Reply Retweet   11:26 Mar-21

Save a tree - kill a beaver

Get a signature like this. CLICK HERE.  

[RonJeffries]

Hello Joshua,

On Mar 21, 2012, at 8:01 AM, Joshua Partogi wrote:

Maybe we should make "Agile Manifesto for non-software" rather than having an endless debate whether we should revise it or not. :-)

You could at least do that. Revising the Agile Manifesto is ... how can I put this ... not something anyone but the 17 of us could do, and we're not likely to do it.

But a more important question is why WOULD you do it? What would you get from doing it?

[Steve Berczuk]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:40 AM, RonJeffries <ronje...@acm.org> wrote:

Hello Joshua,

On Mar 21, 2012, at 8:01 AM, Joshua Partogi wrote:

Maybe we should make "Agile Manifesto for non-software" rather than having an endless debate whether we should revise it or not. :-)

You could at least do that. Revising the Agile Manifesto is ... how can I put this ... not something anyone but the 17 of us could do, and we're not likely to do it.

But a more important question is why WOULD you do it? What would you get from doing it?

At the risk of being too literal, the Agile Manifesto is the Agile Manifesto for Software Development. 3 of the 4 values apply as is to most cases (or I think they do... that might not be certain). The 2nd applies in spirit ("working software")... so it might be an interesting exercise for a group of people who are interested in agile in other contexts to figure out what the value might me.

And, the 12 principles would be somewhat different.

I do think that for the exercise to be meaningful, you'd need to be more specific than "non-software." An attempt at a "General Manifesto for Agile Things" might be so general as to be useless.

Steve

 

--
Steve Berczuk  | steve....@gmail.com | http://www.berczuk.com
Twitter: @sberczuk 
SCM Patterns:   www.scmpatterns.com

[Dan Rawsthorne]

Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, PMP, CST
3Back.com
Author of Exploring Scrum: the Fundamentals

I would say no, not directly. Scrum's job is to maximize value sprint to sprint. Project Management's job is to balance Cost, Schedule, and Scope. Not the same thing... Scrum doesn't claim control over Cost and Schedule, only Scope.

Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, PMP, CST
3Back.com
Author of Exploring Scrum: the Fundamentals

[RonJeffries]

Hi Dan,

On Mar 21, 2012, at 3:24 PM, Dan Rawsthorne wrote:

I would say no, not directly. Scrum's job is to maximize value sprint to sprint. Project Management's job is to balance Cost, Schedule, and Scope. Not the same thing... Scrum doesn't claim control over Cost and Schedule, only Scope.

I've heard you say that but I don't understand it. First: the PO can ship when she wants, as I understand core Scrum. That's Schedule. She may have some agreed or imposed deadline from management. She probably has a provided Team, which implies and at least in software, defines 92% of the budget. That's cost.

To put Schedule in the hands of a PM is bad business: when to ship is a business decision, not a PM one. To change the PO's Team out from under her is to remove her ability to get the best product by the desired date.

You're saying "the PM can set and change the desired date and the budget, and the PO just works Sprint to Sprint". That's a way to go but it is far from what Scrum canon seems to me to say.

So that might be a good Scrummish way to work in an organization that for some reason thinks it's good to have responsibility and authority mis-divided like that. It seems to me to be far from obviously ideal and therefore should not be considered a core tenet.

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

Impossible is not a fact. It is an opinion.  -- Muhammad Ali

[Dan Rawsthorne]

Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, PMP, CST
3Back.com
Author of Exploring Scrum: the Fundamentals

It's a question of the definition of Project Management. If the PO were a Project Manager he/she would have to have dominion over cost, schedule, and scope. Scrum doesn't give the PO that power; it only gives the PO the power over Scope (and Releasibility). As a simple example, I don't think Scrum gives the PO the power to add people to the team or hire subcontractors - that would be a business decision. He makes the need visible, but somebody else (the Project Manager, perhaps) has to make the decision. That's one of the things Scrum is for, right? To expose issues to the business that it needs to deal with.

I think that you should use Scrum for Project Management, but the question was if Scrum was intended for Project Management. I don't think it is. Scrum doesn't use the right words, it doesn't give the PO the right powers... but I do think scrum can easily be extended to do it. This is the subject of the book I'm working on now... it's an interesting set of topics - how to do "big boy" Project Management using Scrum. I'm sure many of the "usual suspects" will hate it. :)

Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, PMP, CST
3Back.com
Author of Exploring Scrum: the Fundamentals

[Bas Vodde]

Hi Dan,

I respectfully don't agree with what you are saying :)

In Scrum, we teach that the PO is responsible for ROI of the product. This mean that Cost/Schedule/Scope decisions are the PO to make.

It doesn't mean the PO is a project manager as, in the good Scrum implementation I've seen, there is no project manager. The tasks and responsibilities of the project manager are distributed over the other Scrum roles and mainly go to the PO and Team (and a bit to the SM). Having a Project Manager in a Scrum organization often leads to very disempowered POs :(

You gave the example of adding people to the team. IMHO and my experience, that is definitively a PO decision... and it is a business decision too, but POs make business decisions...

Bas

[RonJeffries]

Hi Bas,

I must with some regret :) support much of what you say here ...

On Mar 21, 2012, at 8:25 PM, Bas Vodde wrote:

I respectfully don't agree with what you are saying :)

Not this part ...

In Scrum, we teach that the PO is responsible for ROI of the product. This mean that Cost/Schedule/Scope decisions are the PO to make.

It doesn't mean the PO is a project manager as, in the good Scrum implementation I've seen, there is no project manager. The tasks and responsibilities of the project manager are distributed over the other Scrum roles and mainly go to the PO and Team (and a bit to the SM). Having a Project Manager in a Scrum organization often leads to very disempowered POs :(

You gave the example of adding people to the team. IMHO and my experience, that is definitively a PO decision... and it is a business decision too, but POs make business decisions...

I would agree that if we follow Scrum thinking to at least one logical end point, we'll get what you describe here. It is much like what Mary Poppendieck seems to be talking about with the "Product Champion" idea. We might even imagine, if our imaginations were really good, some kind of Scrum of Scrums arrangement with the Product People funding the projects to build something good.

I note in passing that there is always some finite budget cap in money and time. No one says "Go build something, spend what you want, take as long as you want." You're always sent in with some budget. (I mention this to forestall a possible counter-argument, in case Dan thinks of it.)

HOWEVER, on Dan's side of the balance, we are faced with the reality of many companies today. We might argue that they are unenlightened and that a pure Scrum solution would be a better way. And we might be right. 

Nonetheless many companies are going to set up a Project Managment kind of structure, and embedding a PO inside that to run Scrum teams makes a kind of sense. I suggest we'd need a lot of thinking and writing and experimentation to really know the best ways to do this, and I do think Dan has done a lot of that thinking already. 

I would say, Dan, that your description is a good description of an accommodation. A Scrum-But, but one that may well be the best one can do. I'd like to see it described and put in place so as to allow the organization to drift readily into something more ideally Agile. I do question, quite seriously, whether large-scale Agile will look as much like Scrum as we might think. I think it might look more like some kind of Lean, or even Kanban, grafted in.

Ron Jeffries

www.XProgramming.com

If not now, when? -- Rabbi Hillel

[Dan Rawsthorne]

I'll buy that, Ron. When I do analysis I like to separate concerns so that they can be managed, analyzed, and thought of separately. So, I think of the PO (role) as maximizing value each sprint (since each sprint has equal cost, this is same as maximizing ROI, in Ken's terms). Then I think of the Project Manager (role) as balancing the cost, scope, schedule - which is a different set of decisions that cross sprints, like Release Planning and Management. Now, I don't mean the PM role to be the same PM as we can get with PMBOK or whatever, but a agilist who is managing projects - so don't get all "but PMs always are about micromanaging!" on me - because there can be good ones that live the scrum values.

Anyhooh, the PO (person) often does both, and manages the project - especially if it's a single-team Project. This is a ScrumAnd, I think. Or it could be separated out - especially if the Project spans many teams, and hence many POs. The "Chief PO" (as Roman calls him), would them probably play the PM role as part of his/her "PO-ness". Different level, different agility to manage, different tools.

Basically, I don't see this as a ScrumBut, but rather as a ScrumAnd. As you know, I want scrum to have minimal rules/responsibilities and maximal self-organization. By adding the PM stuff to the PO, we are adding rules/responsibilities, so it's a ScrumAnd. More tools in the toolbox.

But, we'll all probably wind up in approximately the same place, as long as we're living the values. That's my guess, anyway... we'll see

Dan  ;-)

Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, PMP, CST
3Back.com
Author of Exploring Scrum: the Fundamentals

[Michael James]

This seems to be imposing a lot of, um, methodology to work around having someone of insufficient authority pretending to be Product Owner.  When I learned Scrum, I learned the PO decides whether to continue development, which is a cost (and schedule and scope) decision.  I'd rather find a Product Owner the organization trusts to make business decisions.

--mj

[RonJeffries]

Hi MJ,

On Mar 22, 2012, at 3:58 AM, Michael James wrote:

This seems to be imposing a lot of, um, methodology to work around having someone of insufficient authority pretending to be Product Owner.  When I learned Scrum, I learned the PO decides whether to continue development, which is a cost (and schedule and scope) decision.  I'd rather find a Product Owner the organization trusts to make business decisions.

I think it depends on where one stands. In a large multi-team project, we are likely to have some fixed monthly or annual budget, some roughly fixed number of people, quite a few teams, and so on.

No single human can be the PO for such a thing. So we must have some kind of "team" of people who manage the money, the team staffing, and the communication of what to do and when, and so on. 

The skills to choose product features, and the skills to manage teams, money, and staff, are quite different. They'll not likely be found in the same individuals, and, in most companies, not even in the same organizations. 

So, hmm, let's first think about product people to be POPs. Maybe they are from the product/marketing side of the house, self-organized somehow, but probably with some kind of PO's PO. We could think of it as a PO "Scrum of Scrums" if we believe in that. These people will generate some kind of Big Backlog and divide it up in multiple ways to parcel it out to teams, using progress monitors to get a sense of where to send items to be done.

The teams will not be fully cross-functional across all technologies, no matter how much we wish they were. So there will be teams for which we do not have enough work, and teams for which we have too much. We'll need to move people around a bit, plus with turnover and so on, we'll have a continuous hiring activity, team formation activity, and so on.

The POs may "drive" a lot of this. They'll have some kind of picture of their teams, team sizes, team budgets. They'll be wanting to inflate this team, deflate that, create this new one, disband this other one.

This work will be continuous and it will need to be better than just reactive. So they'll need people who look at the overall flow of work, project what kinds of work will be going on in three or six months, and balance the money and staffing limitations and so on.

These are functions that map, moderately well, onto the notion of a large-scale Project Manager.

So I can imagine evolving into something like what Dan described.

And, of course, in an existing large organization, one might build it up out of parts from the PM department and the Product Department.

So I think it's not unreasonable, though I hope something more dynamic could actually come into being.

[Dan Rawsthorne]

So would I, mj. But now we're talking about the person, not the role. The PO (role) does not own all the business decisions; there's gotta be a line somewhere. I I prefer to draw it close-in, not far-out, in order to separate the concerns. If they are combined in the same person, that's a different issue.

Dan Rawsthorne, PhD, PMP, CST
3Back.com
Author of Exploring Scrum: the Fundamentals

[John Miller]

Michael,

I have not blogged too much on the Agile piece yet (despite the blog name), in order to share it, but, you will definitely see a lot of the Scrum pieces in the school. I am still gathering it all together. I am focused so much on doing it and spreading it, I have not had the capacity to share it yet. 

I have been thinking deeply about the discussions on this thread and am still reflecting. 

Stephen Peha has a Agile School Manifesto that he developed. 

http://www.infoq.com/articles/agile-schools-education

I am on the fence about it. I do think a manifesto or declaration co-developed between business, parents, agilists, teachers, students and the community would be more powerful. 

The discussion is also changing my presentation ideas at the Scrum Gathering Atlanta. Would developing an Education Manifesto, with a heavy Agile influence (see, I am getting more savvy), together be something people would want to gather and do? Would there be anything that you would like to discuss or see that would attract you to participate?

Here is the program description:

Kiddie Hawk - Scrum In Schools for Generation Agile
John Miller
Your Scrum flight will be fueled by passion and meaning as we show how Scrum is being applied to classrooms and schools. Students are happier, more engaged, more creative, and empowered in an Agile learning environment. Teachers discover their work is more rewarding and fun. Understand why Agile is the BEST learning environment for 21st Century learners. A call to arms for us to ban together & outreach to schools using our Scrum expertise to build better schools & a brighter future for our children. Discover a new meaning in Scrum, and how it can power your passion to improve the world.

[John Miller]

Hello All,

I have been thinking deeply about this thread, and want to thank you all for some great discussions and insights.

Regarding and Agile Education Manifesto, I think it would be a lot of fun and useful in focusing Agile in education.

With that said, there are just way too many Manifestos propogating the Internet. I found about 8-10 education manifestos, my favorite being Seth Godin's New Education Manifesto http://www.squidoo.com/stop-stealing-dreams . I believe Scrum actualizes the New education Manifesto, but, delivers it all together, if the Scrum Agile values are strived for. So, I see no need for yet another Manifesto, but, my opinion on that is not solid.

Regarding if Agile is Agile in Education, I say yes. But, it does not matter, as longs as it accomplishes the goals. I see the goals as providing vibrant growth and adaptability in a highly uncertain and complex world.

So, is it Scrum?

As Socrates would say, "Define your terms!"

The definition of Scrum:

Scrum is a framework for developing and sustaining complex products

Complex (As in complex adaptive systems)

Entity consisting of many diverse and autonomous components or parts (called agents) which are interrelated, interdependent, linked through many (dense) interconnections, and behave as a unified whole in learning from experience and in adjusting (not just reacting) to changes in the environment.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/complex-adaptive-system-CAS.html#ixzz1r2gBdezX

product

noun

1.

a thing produced by labor: products of farm and factory; theproduct of his thought.

2.

a person or thing produced by or resulting from a process,as a natural, social, or historical one; result: He is a productof his time.

3.

the totality of goods or services that a company makesavailable; output: a decrease in product during the past year.

4.

Chemistry . a substance obtained from another substancethrough chemical change.

Conclusion

I can confidently conclude that development and sustaining of learning and growth of a student, and any human, is a complex product.  We use the Scrum framework of Planning, Sprints, Reviews, and Retrospectives to do so.

I look forward to the responses ; )

John Miller

http://agileschools.blogspot.com