Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Jeff Sutherland @ Google, Dec 14 2009

Interesting discussion at Google on Monday evening this week. Slides are available at the link below. Available also is the Systematic Ready Ready Checklist for Product Backlog discussed during the presentation. The talk was based on the Agile 2009 experience report:
C. Jakobsen and J. Sutherland, "Scrum and CMMI – Going from Good to Great: are you ready-ready to be done-done?," in Agile 2009, Chicago, 2009.

A Practical Roadmap to Great Scrum: A Systematic Guide to Hyperproductivity

In the field of Large-scale application of Agile, the best data set comes from a CMMI Level 5 company that is providing data collected from over 100 highly disciplined Scrum teams. Based on the lessons found in this data, Jeff will describe how a new team can follow the path of Systematic Software Engineering and double productivity by focusing on "product DONE," then double it again by focusing on "product backlog READY." Current research shows that any team can achieve hyper-productivity in a few sprints, even in a dysfunctional company. This presentation will show the audience how to do it and how easy it can be, if they work to remove impediments.

The talk is free, but due to space constraints, attendance is limited and RSVP is required.

Registration, socializing, and light refreshment from 5:15 - 6:00.
Doors close at 5:45
Talk and Q&A from 6:00 - 7:30

111 Eighth Ave - 10th Floor
New York, NY 10011
(use the doors by the Chase Manhattan Bank near 15th Street)


kjscotland said...

Hi Jeff,

In the slide deck you say:
84% of companies are using Scrum
Only 47% are doing iterative

Your conclusion assumes that iterative development is the same as time-boxed development.

I have another conclusion. That 37% are using time-boxes, but only to increment, and that they never iterate to revisit functionality to improve it.

For me, iteration and time-boxing are different things.


Peter M said...

Musing on your video presentation at Google about Adwords, I started to think about different types of organisations (software at the core or otherwise of what they do) and thought this might drive the way they put a 'methodology' together and how open they would be to Scrum running the whole show.

I wrote this:

"Different kinds of organisation build software differently. Why might that be? Maybe it’s true that for some organisations Prince2 or PMBOK, or Scrum are absolutely the right choices. Maybe for a certain organisation .net is the way to go or Java, or Ruby on Rails. Perhaps your organisation captures requirements in natural language, or with use cases, or in user stories and that works fine for you. Probably every organisation in the world uses software, but for some software is the centre of their universe and for others it is a support function."

I went on to develop the idea at I'd love to have your views...


Peter Merrick Ph.D

Jeff Sutherland said...

General Motors built cars different than Toyota. The government had to fire the senior management. Why would that be?