Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 452 posts

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#141

Post by la6471 »

lordnacho wrote: post #17

The thing about Scrum is the observations and principles make sense, but then to sell it as a course they've turned it into very specific prescriptions. I went on a scrum course and the takeaway was basically that feedback is a big deal, and you should try to get some repeatedly and quickly. It's also common sense that you should have tasks written down somewhere, and that some of them are more important than others.…

The author is not completely correct , in big tech project managers are assigned to manage projects , depending on complexity and collaboration needs.

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#142

Post by spaetzleesser »

My theory is that in tech companies top management usually understands how tech development works and have respect for their workers.

At my company top management often comes from a sales or medical background and you can clearly see that in how they treat sales people and medical people. They get promoted more and receive way more attention from management because they understand each other.

IT and software are a big, scary mystery to management so they are prone to take advice from snake oil salespeople, consultants, or middle managers who tell them what they want to hear.

I think in general I think you are better off in companies where the output of your work is the product and top management understands and respects your work. Better to be viewed as someone who contributes to the profits of the company and not just as a cost center.

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#143

Post by nickd2001 »

akudha wrote: post #84
lordnacho wrote: post #17

The thing about Scrum is the observations and principles make sense, but then to sell it as a course they've turned it into very specific prescriptions. I went on a scrum course and the takeaway was basically that feedback is a big deal, and you should try to get some repeatedly and quickly. It's also common sense that you should have tasks written down somewhere, and that some of them are more important than others.…

The problem with any system is that people try to enforce it, military style. In my previous job, we did scrum, but not too strict. We had two week cycles, not-too-strict deadlines (most of the time) etc. If I finished my task early, I was free to pick up tasks from the planned list, without having to get permission from my manager. We also didn't agonize over story points, retrospective etc. We did it light hearted…

" I realized that it all comes down to "metrics" - end of every sprint, my manager has to present it to his bosses". I wonder how widespread this is.. Certainly that's exactly what I experienced at a previous workplace, and worse than that, people's performance was judged on whether they'd done exactly the "right" stories in a 2 week sprint. Rather than thinking about developing software, people were working out how to game the system to ensure their metrics were good. I cannot see how this can have done the employer any good. I've now moved jobs, to a place that's far more Kanban, and if mid-story we encounter bugs that need fixing, or opportunities to improve something, or something else useful that piques our fancy, then as long as the whole team agree and our overarching goals are being worked toward , we can work naturally, rather than rigidly.

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#145

Post by mk89 »

nickd2001 wrote: post #143
akudha wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with any system is that people try to enforce it, military style. In my previous job, we did scrum, but not too strict. We had two week cycles, not-too-strict deadlines (most of the time) etc. If I finished my task early, I was free to pick up tasks from the planned list, without having to get permission from my manager. We also didn't agonize over story points, retrospective etc. We did it light hearted…

" I realized that it all comes down to "metrics" - end of every sprint, my manager has to present it to his bosses". I wonder how widespread this is.. Certainly that's exactly what I experienced at a previous workplace, and worse than that, people's performance was judged on whether they'd done exactly the "right" stories in a 2 week sprint. Rather than thinking about developing software, people were working out how…

Interesting, I had a very similar experience in the past.

I think we just were part of a software factory that is not necessarily bad, it's just a different approach to work. It's much more convenient for a manager to just apply "standard" principles (scrum, 2 weeks, story points, velocity, etc. like a mantra) rather than innovating at this risk of being wrong, difficult, etc.

Too much bureaucracy is not good, maybe that was the purpose of this article. The more you have it, the more difficult it becomes to get out of it, to innovate, etc.

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#146

Post by khyryk »

david422 wrote: post #138
CraneWorm wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they mean when your retro board has a theme; I've seen various themes applied successfully i.e. sailboat: https://metroretro.io/templates/the-sailboat-retrospective

Is it just me or does this look great for a 2nd grade class.

It sort of betrays how people think of tech nerds. :)

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#147

Post by mk89 »

david422 wrote: post #138
CraneWorm wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they mean when your retro board has a theme; I've seen various themes applied successfully i.e. sailboat: https://metroretro.io/templates/the-sailboat-retrospective

Is it just me or does this look great for a 2nd grade class.

We do it at my company/in my team. It's OK, come on, it's not that bad.

It's also a way for our team to get together and talk BS, have a little bit of fun etc.

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#148

Post by jhugo »

seanhunter wrote: post #139
erikwiffin wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's value in that debate (within reason) even as a developer. If Alice thinks a task is worth 5, and Bob thinks it's worth 8, then there's a good chance one of them knows something the other does not. Is Bob aware of some hidden complexity that bumps it up 3 points? Or is Alice familiar with a convenient library that solves exactly that complexity? Planning poker is a convenient time to get that knowledge…

> there's a good chance one of them knows something the other does not Or that the assignment of points is arbitrary and imprecise and that different people have different ways of making up numbers.

Exactly this. It's probably not an accident that one of those numbers is half of 10 (and the number of fingers on one hand) – a common made-up number for everybody – and the other is 2^3 – a common made-up number for programmers.

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#149

Post by mLuby »

pc86 wrote: post #97
arcbyte wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Dev, I loved SAFE. It changed everything about how our program operated to the point our delivery became extremely predictable and we still had every 9th and 10th week to tinker on new ideas or do refactoring and cleanup where we wanted. That program purred like nothing else I've ever been a part of. Senior leaders sat with devs, started talking to everyone about their priorities - people we had never seen befor…

Why is it that every criticism of agile/scrum/safe is met with "well you just weren't really doing it?"

A general goes to the commander of a group of soldiers and says "In 3 months, I want them to be able to demo the "march in formation" feature in front of the big-wigs who decide whether to give us more funding."

So the commander says "Yes General, we'll do Drills™ to make it happen."

And then the commander writes down "Do drills" on a TODO list, gives presentations to the soldiers about the importance of drills, and maybe even hires a certified Drill Sergeant.

But the commander and soldiers never actually do drills. They clean their rifles, practice shooting, and do other soldiery things, but no drilling.

3 months later, surprise surprise, the soldiers walk all over themselves at the big parade, the general is angry, and the commander is confused why simply talking about drilling didn't work.

Re: How big tech runs tech projects and the curious absence of Scrum

#150

Post by comeonseriously »

akudha wrote: post #84
lordnacho wrote: post #17

The thing about Scrum is the observations and principles make sense, but then to sell it as a course they've turned it into very specific prescriptions. I went on a scrum course and the takeaway was basically that feedback is a big deal, and you should try to get some repeatedly and quickly. It's also common sense that you should have tasks written down somewhere, and that some of them are more important than others.…

The problem with any system is that people try to enforce it, military style. In my previous job, we did scrum, but not too strict. We had two week cycles, not-too-strict deadlines (most of the time) etc. If I finished my task early, I was free to pick up tasks from the planned list, without having to get permission from my manager. We also didn't agonize over story points, retrospective etc. We did it light hearted…

Scrum is Agile, strictly enforced.
Post reply on HN