Re: scrum

On May 1, 3:52=A0pm, "jk" <aq...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  (not the q's)> wrote:
> "Gosi" <gos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:5914d996-14cb-4ac5-b218-744983f14c35@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Apr 30, 11:32 pm, "Stephen Taylor <edi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>"
>
>
>
> <StephenTaylorF...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > On Apr 29, 2:32 pm, Gosi <gos...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > What is the groups feeling about Scrum?
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrum_(development)
>
> > > Is this used in APL development groups?
>
> > > Would it be of use for APL development?
>
> > The agile-development method I've studied (XP) posits a minimum team
> > size of 4-6. Few APL projects would qualify.
>
> > XP seems to get most of its bang out of upping the bandwidth and
> > lowering the latency of intrateam communication. With much smaller
> > teams it's harder to see from where the payoff would come.
>
> > Made a serious attempt to exploit XP with a team of 3-5 over a year or
> > more. Some of the practices worked for us; others had strictly-limited
> > usefulness. So I would deny that we implemented XP. (I remember Beck
> > sharply intervening in a seminar to distinguish XP's principles from
> > its practices. I would claim we were solid on the four principles.)
>
> > Stephen Taylor
> > edi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> There are some key issues regarding scrum tehniques.
> There is nothing that says there needs to be a minimum number in a
> group.
> In fact you can apply scrum to your own diet program.
> It is called Solo Scrum.
> Better is duo or three to five.
>
> What is important is to hold frequent meaningful short meetings.
> Meetings held standing, 15 to 30 minutes max.
> Talk about issues.
> Only pigs allowed to speek unless a chicken is asked a specific
> question.
> Very important is to finish tasks quickly.
> If tasks are to big then they need to be split up.
> If tasks seem to get stuck then bring in qhicken to assist or move to
> another group.
> Main goal is to have progress and not hold tasks hostage.
>
>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> (my OE is not indenting)
> my comment:
> in my view this ought to be regular policy in efficient meeting,
scarcely =
found
> however ...
> (usually it's in the hands of the Chair - fortunately we had one in our
of=
fice)

I think that these kind of meetings are common in efficient companies.
If you happen to go to a meeting longer than 30 minutes you will
notice that most of the time you see nothing hapening and most of the
people in the meeting fall a sleep.
Another important thing is that if the meeting is supposed to start at
10 then everyone supposed to be there should be there at 10 and
participate in the meeting.
If you arrive at 10:15 the meeting is likely to be finished or just
about to finish.
The most effective projects I have led have been done this way since
decades ago.
It is also very important that each person not participate in more
than two or three meetings each day at most and preferably only one.
It is also important to hold one or two meetings every day.