« Software Archaeology, Do You Dig It? | Main | Taking an Iterative Approach to Meandering »

03 February 2014


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


And may explain the growing interest in Kanban?


I remember the original "theme-based" approach, but it was a bit idealistic and not as embracing of change as iterations. Maybe that's why iterations were adopted by much of the Scrum community? Do you think Scrum adapted to take bits of XP that were more adaptable than Scrum's native approach, or do you think it was a misunderstanding/bastardisation? I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that.


Whoa! That bit of history about scrum not having stories back in the day is hugely illuminating! Our company has been weak about using sprint goals, strong on stories. As such, sprint goals always seemed to me a weird add-on. I like the idea that they can provide a clear beacon that doesn't change, even if the stories have to get torn up and rethought mid-sprint, but it seemed that was a rare case. And because sprint goals got developed at sprint planning to bundle together stories that had been groomed previously, attempts to get the team to define them usually fell flat. On the occasions where they did it, referring back to the goal (rather than just focusing on the set of stories), felt forced.

Understanding that stories were a later addition clears that up. And it makes me wonder if we should be relying on stories less and goals more. I have to think about this some more and figure out how to use sprint goals correctly.

Thanks for the post!

The comments to this entry are closed.