Prince2, licht en effectief
I’d like you all to know that I’ve published a whitebook called ‘Prince2, licht en effectief’. It is published in Dutch though.
You can find it here.
Velocity planning or capacity planning (or both)?
Traditionally (if that even exists with agile project management) the team’s velocity is expressed in the number of story points delivered per iteration (sprint).
In an ideal (theoretical) world, the next iteration’s velocity should be the same (or slightly better) then the last one. In the real world this is not the case. One cause is the fact that people don’t work all the time. They go on holidays, become ill, need training, etc. and don’t distribute there time off evenly over all iterations. Less capacity means less products delivered means less story points delivered.
Lean Business Process Design
In most projects some amount of analysis is required. With an agile method like Scrum there’s no room for a separate analysis phase. It is assumed that analysis can be done concurrently with design and build activities. This is often true when the business process is known.
Sometimes also the business process needs to be determined. This is the case with new processes but also when process optimization is needed. The problem with this is that analysis can take a long time and often software development is stalled. Another potential problem is that the people whom do the analysis are not the same people as those that build the software. A transfer of knowledge is required and that’s something to be avoided when possible.
The traditional waterfall approach of course is not the solution. This approach creates other, much larger problems.
So can a substantional amount of analysis be done in an agile manner?
Implementing Scrum, ‘crash’ start or controlled start?
Most people advocate a “crash” start when implementing Scrum. Don’t think, just go!
It’s very difficult to explain the advantages of Scrum when the customer is not used to “agile” thinking. Because Scrum delivers tangible results in short increments one could think it’s possibly better to let the results do the talking.
Here in the Netherlands the Prince2 project management method is widely used. Prince2 has a “controlled start” phase in which an elaborate project plan is created. Only after approval of this plan the project is started. Interestingly, this startup phase is considered to be a major success factor within the Prince2 method.
Is there any use for a controlled start when implementing Scrum?
Psychology of a timebox approach
Timeboxes are widely used in agile and non-agile projects. The idea is that scope is (or should be) limited to the amount that is feasible within the given timeframe.
The assumption is that the team is capable of limiting itself to tasks that can be completed within the timebox. But what happens when the teams discovers that a specific task can not be completed?