3 ms·
I agree it's rarely "done right", but I've been in career long enough that waterfall was still common early in career and horrible crunch time targeting some da
by gedy 3y ago
I agree it's rarely "done right", but I've been in career long enough that waterfall was still common early in career and horrible crunch time targeting some date at end of 9-12 months projects was inevitable - Scrum was a total breath of fresh air back in 2005-2006 and saved my sanity.
Basically we'd ask mgmt "what do you want next?" and they had to fuck off for the next 4 weeks while devs, ux, QA worked with no changes in plans until next demo and release. They were responsible for figuring out "when will everything be done?" etc.
I recently left a startup that said they were "doing Scrum" and it was just daily task tracking and pushing devs to overcommit to each sprint - that's not what I consider Scrum.
- gedy 3y agoI should clarify: we had one of the early Scrum guys (Ken Schwaber) come in and train devs, QA, UX, and management - so there was little room for people to hide behind random interpretations of "agile" and it really helped us to start out correctly.
- theshrike79 3y ago"pushing devs to overcommit to each sprint" Yeah, that's definitely not Scrum like you said. The whole point is that the team promises to deliver features during a sprint and won't overcommit, they might deliver extra if they have extra time. If your sprints continuously fail to deliver, then you need to decrease the team's velocity.
- gedy 3y agoYeah it was really messed up - their "velocity tracking" was so they could make sure devs committed to at least as many points as the last sprint, even if they didn't finish the last sprint.. I only lasted there 4 months before I quit.