Agile working (none software)

[Azza]

So that's what I've do with my backlog items - break them down into tasks, exactly like you said there.

I could break the backlog item into two backlog items, but then I've got two backlog items in my sprint instead of one? Both of which keep rolling over until the supplier responds or the other team does their bit

We used to use Kanban but now everybody uses DevOps. Everything is a sprint. Everything is a backlog item.

Often I despair watching my backlog items roll over from week to week. It makes me look bad every time it happens. Yet often it's just the nature of the work.

The example I gave being fairly typical of (one aspect of) my job.

Why do you personally have responsibility for backlog or blocked (because they're awaiting further info or work from another team) items?

 

[theone8181]

So I guess your boss has introduced a process then undermined it anyway - is he supposed to be the "product owner" in this scenario?

Tbh I can't remember who's who as it makes no difference to me. I just get on with what I can.

 

[Crpwned]

Reading all these I can see that people are conflating 2 things. Just because you are using SCRUM doesn't mean you're agile.

Agile is a mindset, a guiding set of principles that can be applied to a multitude of different environments and practices, not just software development.

Where I can see most of you falling down is you have taken a methodology such as SCRUM and tried to shoehorn it into your work, without understanding what agile is actually about.

I see this happen a lot as an agile delivery manager/scrummaster/coach/whatever you want to call it, where management has seen the buzz around agile and tried to force it down upon people with little to no understanding of what those core principles actually mean. They just see a framework and think that must be the solution.

All the frameworks out there are merely suggestions, there's is no one way that works for everyone. Find what works best for you, inspect, adapt and grow it to meet your needs whilst referring back to those agile principles.

 

[dowie]

Reading all these I can see that people are conflating 2 things. Just because you are using SCRUM doesn't mean you're agile.

Well it does if you're actually using it and not just playing lip service to it - scrum is an agile framework, if you're actually using it then you are "agile". If you're just changing a few job titles, having some meetings but letting old ways of doing things get in the way then perhaps not.

 

[Conanius]

Hi guys, we've recently had this forced on us at work, but it seems now we just end up having roughly 2 days of meeting a fortnight and don't get any more work done (we actually get less done as it's a practical job and the meetings are at our desks via teams). Has anyone used this and it worked well? I suspect there will be a different in opinions between mangers and works (I'm a worker not a manager). It seems like a mega inefficient way of working.

The reason you have a problem is the first sentence. IME - to make it work, Agile working is a cultural mindset change.

The fact you're not seeing the value in the meetings suggests the business change to implement this in your organisation is..... lacking.

As per any methodology. You need to adopt and adapt to your business, and focus on small incremental change (Kaizen). You need to accept not everything will work out, but everything you change will give you a learning opportunity.

I've played around with various 'big ticket' methodologies for organising businesses. More traditional approaches like ITIL/PRINCE2 or 'funky new age lean stuff' like Agile - notably Scrum & Kanban. None is any better or worse than another.

I've done quite a decent amount of Agile certification and been working in Agile roles for several years. I'm still right at the beginning of my learning journey.

 

[OspreyO]

I've not worked with it. If be curious if the places embracing it are generally more open to new ideas, methodologies and following procedures. Or does it work in places where people are terrible at this kinda stuff .

I've never had a problem with waterfall etc with the right people. Nothing works well with the wrong people.

 

[Crpwned]

Well it does if you're actually using it and not just playing lip service to it - scrum is an agile framework, if you're actually using it then you are "agile". If you're just changing a few job titles, having some meetings but letting old ways of doing things get in the way then perhaps not.

Actually no, just because you are using Scrum does not automatically mean you're agile.

I've seen a few companies use scrum, or other methodologies, thinking they're agile but still failing to completely miss the core principles that make up an agile way of delivery.

 

[dowie]

Actually no, just because you are using Scrum does not automatically mean you're agile.

I've seen a few companies use scrum, or other methodologies, thinking they're agile but still failing to completely miss the core principles that make up an agile way of delivery.

In what way? I mean you seem to be hinting at companies saying they're using it but not actually doing so... in which case yes.

Scrum is inherently agile, it's literally an agile methodology.

 

[Crpwned]

In what way? I mean you seem to be hinting at companies saying they're using it but not actually doing so... in which case yes.

Scrum is inherently agile, it's literally an agile methodology.

Wrong again I'm afraid. Scrum can certainly allow people to be agile, but it doesn't automatically mean you ARE agile.

Ok, a few examples off the top of my head -
A team is doing daily stand-ups, a typical Scrum ceremony, however these stand-ups are 30mins to an hour long, and the CEO also attends them. Is this agile? Nope.
Sprint review is conducted, but the people that you are doing a demo for are the senior internal stakeholders who won't actually be using the product . Is that agile? Nope.
At the end of your sprint you have several items still left to do that you brought in. You decide to just extend the sprint for a week to get these cleared off before starting a new one. Is this agile? Nope

There's a million other examples of people using Scrum, with no real underlying knowledge of what Agile is. it's just a buzzword they heard and forced people to adopt a broken implementation of it.

One of the worst examples I've seen is a company who was running sprints, but it start with the design team doing a 3 week sprint, then handing over to development team to do a 2 week sprint, which then got handed to a QA/testing team for a 1 week sprint. They were 'doing Scrum' but it was just a horrible waterfall interpretation under a different name.

 

[dowie]

One of the worst examples I've seen is a company who was running sprints, but it start with the design team doing a 3 week sprint, then handing over to development team to do a 2 week sprint, which then got handed to a QA/testing team for a 1 week sprint. They were 'doing Scrum' but it was just a horrible waterfall interpretation under a different name.

How are they "doing scrum" then? You're basically giving examples of people not doing scrum... but just using terminology or bastardising the thing.

Scrum is an agile framework. You might as well claim that not all people who are agile actually are agile - it depends what you mean, if you're including people who are simply claiming to be following some agile process but aren't really then sure, but there is a clear flaw there.

 

[Crpwned]

How are they "doing scrum" then? You're basically giving examples of people not doing scrum... but just using terminology or bastardising the thing.

Scrum is an agile framework. You might as well claim that not all people who are agile actually are agile - it depends what you mean, if you're including people who are simply claiming to be following some agile process but aren't really then sure, but there is a clear flaw there.

That example was to show how a company thinks they're agile because they have teams running scrum, but as a whole they aren't agile.

What about the other examples I provided? Inherent parts of scrum, that if done badly lead to the team not really being fundamentally agile.

People running Scrum, but doing it badly will not be agile and that's my point. Just because you 'do Scrum' does not make you agile. Not sure of you're missing that point so thought I would reiterate it for you.

And yes, there are plenty of people out there that claim they're agile but they aren't.

 

[dowie]

That's hardly confined to scrum - essentially people trying to be agile but not actually being agile won't be agile.

I mean you could say just because you're using any agile methodology doesn't mean you're agile or just because you think you have an agile mindset doesn't mean you're agile etc... the exceptions there however would be people doing something inherently not-agile.

 

[Crpwned]

I mean you could say just because you're using any agile methodology doesn't mean you're agile or just because you think you have an agile mindset doesn't mean you're agile etc..

Wait what? That's exactly what Im saying. So we're in agreement then? Glad we cleared that up before we went further down the dowie-hole

 

[Burnsy2023]

That example was to show how a company thinks they're agile because they have teams running scrum, but as a whole they aren't agile.

I've always explained it as the difference between Agile and agile. You can bring in Scrum to add Agile processes, but ultimately you need a change in culture, behaviours and values to be agile.

 

[Crpwned]

I've always explained it as the difference between Agile and agile. You can bring in Scrum to add Agile processes, but ultimately you need a change in culture, behaviours and values to be agile.

This guy gets it.

 

[Pants]

To be fair I thought it was quite clear that dowie is saying if you are using SCRUM properly then you are agile. Of course if you are not using it properly (or any other agile framework properly) then you might not be agile.

My experience of agile, be it Kanban, scrum or something we have arrived at in between, has been fantastic. The key for us has been nailing the retrospectives (you are going to eventually get it right if you keep changing for the better) and focusing on removing any unnecessary people between the team and the user. Ideally the user is part of the team. It's hard to get right but when it works it really works. You need the whole company to be invested in it and not just one delivery team trained.

This is mainly from software developers perspective, but also as scrum master and now and manager.

It seems that a lot of places are sadly "implementing it" just to tick a box which will never work. There's no reason it can't work outside of software, see kanban and toyoya...

 

[dowie]

To be fair I thought it was quite clear that dowie is saying if you are using SCRUM properly then you are agile. Of course if you are not using it properly (or any other agile framework properly) then you might not be agile.

Yes, indeed and the exceptions mentioned seem to be people not using it properly. It doesn't need to be some vague stuff about "agile mindset" etc.. it's simply people not really committing to putting it into practice and/or trying to keep hold of old ways of doing things, old responsibilities etc..

 

[Conanius]

I think there is something really interesting in some of the comments in this thread after re-reading them after I posted earlier today.

Going from where people are to "Agile" is a journey.

Sometimes starting the ceremonies is simply part of the business change journey. It is an easy thing to relate to, and even done imperfectly it gives an opportunity for inspection. Through retrospectives people can reflect on how helpful it was that the CEO attended the daily stand up, what benefit came from a 1hr stand up, and why having the Head of Accounts at the demo was wrong. If every bit of business change you've ever done 'just worked' then you're either a twin horned unicorn or you don't have much experience.

If someone is more Agile today than they were yesterday, then like it or not, they're using Kaizen theory and respecting principles that you find in Kanban like "Start with what you are doing now". They should be applauded for their successes and supported in continuing the journey (If indeed, it continues to show business improvement.

IME turning the world upside down and doing dramatic change (Kaikaku) has serious change adoption issues.... unless of course the existing culture is massively poisonous etc.

 

[theone8181]

So for my next sprint (which is really only about 8.5 days of work), I've been given about 40 points. Thats why it doesn't work for us, **** poor management.

 

[Nutty_Death]

So for my next sprint (which is really only about 8.5 days of work), I've been given about 40 points. Thats why it doesn't work for us, **** poor management.

Yeah, you don't get assigned points/ stories in scrum.
The sprint plan is a team commitment based on prior velocities and refinement of the stories by the team.
It doesn't make sense to pre assign a ticket because you should work collectively as a team to achieve your sprint goal.

Sounds like a sprint of people just working in silo against a plan they didn't agree to.