Skip to main content

Lean Agile Scrum Conference High Points

Speaking as the organizer, the conference was one high point after another: The high caliber sessions from Switzerland and abroad, the keynote speakers, the interactions among the participants. Judging from the participants feedback, the workshop with Henrik Kniberg and Tom & Mary Poppendieck received the highest notes.

There was really only one low point: the long wait for food at lunch. As lean thinkers we should have thought more about the flow!

SwissIT Magazine published a short article online and more detailed article in their latest print edition. My favorite quote in the print edition came from Adrian Honegger, Co-CIO of Baloise Insurance (and speaker at the Conference):

"The organizers of the Lean Agile Scrum Conference 2010 succeeded in bringing together interested participants from Coders to the IT Executive, including people from numerous branches of industry and experienced speakers. Summary of the successful event: the rapidly accelerating market dynamics and increasing complexity, the not only ICT companies face, are forcing companies to become leaner and more agile, so that they can react immediately and adequately to new trends, dangers and uncertainties. In the long term, the winners will be those IT organizations which successfully master the transition to Lean, Agile and Scrum."

My personal high points were the Keynote speakers. Henrik make complicated topics simple and the Poppendiecks bring home why management and agile teams need each other. I learned a lot from both, much of which will be really useful when talking to management, and look forward to seeing them again.

BTW - The Poppendiecks will be coming back to give their lean leadership course next spring!

The presentations are online on the conference home page.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Scaling Scrum: SAFe, DAD, or LeSS?

Participants in last week's Scrum MasterClass wanted to evaluate approaches to scaling Scrum and Agile for their large enterprise. So I set out to review the available frameworks. Which one is best for your situation?

Recently a number of approaches have started gaining attention, including the Scaled Agile Framework ("SAFe") by Dean Leffingwell, Disciplined Agile Development (DAD), by Scott Ambler, and Large Scale Scrum (LeSS), by Craig Larman and Bas Vodde. (Follow the links for white papers or overviews of each approach).

How to compare these approaches? My starting point is Scrum in the team. Scrum has proven very effective at helping teams perform, even though it does not directly address the issues surrounding larger organizations and teams. An approach to scaling Scrum should not be inconsistent with Scrum itself.

Scrum implements a small number of principles and constraints: Inspect and Adapt. An interdisciplinary Team solves the problem. Deliver something of va…

Sample Definition of Done

Why does Scrum have a Definition of Done? Simple, everyone involved in the project needs to know and understand what Done means. Furthermore, Done should be really done, as in, 'there is nothing stopping us from earning value with this function, except maybe the go-ahead from the Product Owner. Consider the alternative:
Project Manager: Is this function done?
Developer: Yes
Project Manager: So we can ship it?
Developer: Well, No. It needs to be tested, and I need to write some documentation, but the code works, really. I tested it... (pause) ...on my machine. What's wrong with this exchange? To the developer and to the project manager, "done" means something rather different. To the developer in this case, done means: "I don't have to work on this piece of code any more (unless the tester tells me something is wrong)." The project leader is looking for a statement that the code is ready to ship.

At its most basic level, a definition of Done creates a sh…

10 Warning Signs, that your team is not self-organizing

How do you know that self-organization is working? The Bern Chapter of Scrum Breakfast Club looked into this questions, and identified the following warning signs (which I have taken the liberty of translating).

The team reports to the Scrum Master at the Daily ScrumPeople wait for instructions from the Scrum MasterTeam members don't hold each other responsible [for their commitments]The same impediment comes up twice"That's the way it is" => resignation"I" instead of "We"Flip charts are lonelyCulture of conflict-avoidanceDecisions processes are unclear, nor are they discussedPersonal goals are more important than team goals
To this list I would add my a couple of my favorites:
you don't see a triangle on the task board (not working according prioritization of stories)after the daily Scrum, people return directly to their desks (no collaboration)there are a least as many stories in progress as team members (no pairing)
P.S. You can join the …