4 ms·
>and what happens when JIRA does not reflect the actual priority as observed by devs? Why do you believe devs alone define the "actual priority"? This stuff is
by EpicEng 6y ago
>and what happens when JIRA does not reflect the actual priority as observed by devs?
Why do you believe devs alone define the "actual priority"? This stuff is collaborative, and I've worked with many devs who don't have the first clue as to what needs to be built by when in order to keep the business thriving.
- x0x0 6y agoIt's a common symptom of devs who undervalue the rest of the business. And who think that code magically turns into dollars without effort.
- SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago> Why do you believe devs alone define the "actual priority"? This stuff is collaborative, I do not believe that, of course it is collaborative. Some things are emergent, some are not. Some can be neatly broken down into fixed length tasks, some cannot. Some are planned, some are not. Some are top-down, some are bottom up. Some are obvious business function items, some are leftfield ideas. I'm just feeding back that attempting to mediate and regulate that collaboration via JIRA is a bad idea. A common, and bad idea.
- grendix 6y agoIt's kind of weird how the subtext to every conversation in this topic is bad management, yet nobody wants to come out and say it.
- SideburnsOfDoom 6y agoYou're not wrong, but also "we shape our tools, and thereafter our tools shape us". ( Marshall McLuhan ) JIRA tends to shape management into bad management. That is the grain of the tool.