Live data from Hacker News

I don’t believe in sprints

robinrendle.com

431–440 of 459 posts

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#431
post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not really sure what your point is.

That construction work is just as bad as software delivery, when the same shortcuts in quality are taken.

That's fair. A builder could build a terrible house from the same blueprints as another built a great house.

However that's not really what I'm talking about. Assuming some minimum level of quality, 2 houses built from the same blueprints with the same materials and finishes, in similar locations, and by similarly skilled craftsman will be pretty much indistinguishable from each other to the end user.

That's not the case with software.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like an organizational failure rather than sprint/agile/scrum. It works beautifully when lead in/by tech teams.

> It works beautifully when lead in/by tech teams. What software development methodology does not work well under these circumstances?

Fair point. Too much managerial bandwidth is a red flag in a tech org.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#433
post #6

This is nothing but a bad strawman from start to finish. Sprints are not made to help organize things, they're a tool to get more predictable deliveries. Their very short nature forces participants to construct tasks that are easier to estimate and therefore complete on time with a higher probability. This certainly adds overhead to an idealised scenario where people take the shortest reasonble route often enough and…

Sprints are for middle management to keep projects from getting out of hand, they aren't for programmers or programmer freedom. When you understand this simple principal it all makes a lot more sense. It's really no deeper than that. All the stuff grafted on top of that as "support for" is pretty much all feel good fluff and unproven social theory.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#434
post #176
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it challenging to estimate my own time in tasks. Part of every task is figuring out how to actually do the thing you are wanting to do, and sometimes that takes 5 minutes and sometimes much longer. So I am terrible at estimating my own time, and even worse at estimating someone else’s. It doesn’t add pressure to a person if you give them a time goal they know is basically arbitrary.

That means the task is underspecified. You should schedule a "figure this out" instead, and once the task is well defined it can be done.

A meeting to plan for the meeting. Instead of turtles, it's meetings all the way down.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Work in Progress". "Strict" Kanban is about minimizing in flight stuff that you don't have bandwidth for. (Strict "traffic limits" based on team size in any specific column.)

Thank you for the clarification, but I am afraid you lost me at this part: > "Strict" Kanban is about minimizing in flight stuff that you don't have bandwidth for. (Strict "traffic limits" based on team size in any specific column.) What is "in flight stuff" and "traffic limits?" Are you saying strict Kanban minimizes the number of tasks that are in progress in order to prevent overloading the team i.e., there is an…

Yes, WIP (work on progress) limits are a key feature of Kanban.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#436
Sprints are good to force a cycle of feedback on dev team vs customer.

But they are not the problem you are trying to solve, just a tool.

I like the concept of false idols in christianity: you must orient yourself toward truth and love (building something good and truthful).

That must be your highest value. Money, prestige, UML charts, Sprints, those are all false idols, they will lead you astray if you worship them.

Only worship truth and love.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#437
post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I developed a preference for scrum style sprints as both an engineer and as a manager, because I prefer to work collaboratively where everyone knows what everyone else is working on and everyone gets a chance to have a say Are sprints necessary for knowing what other people are working on, and for having a say? I thought sprints are only tangential there.

No, you can absolutely achieve that goal using other processes. However, in my experience I've found sprints to be the way that works best for the teams I've been on and those I've lead. But it all depends on the team and how they structure the sprints. In the case of the teams I've been on and lead, the sprint is structured with a planning meeting at the beginning of the sprint in which everyone goes over each story…

Thanks for elaborating, I appreciate it.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Work in Progress". "Strict" Kanban is about minimizing in flight stuff that you don't have bandwidth for. (Strict "traffic limits" based on team size in any specific column.)

Thank you for the clarification, but I am afraid you lost me at this part: > "Strict" Kanban is about minimizing in flight stuff that you don't have bandwidth for. (Strict "traffic limits" based on team size in any specific column.) What is "in flight stuff" and "traffic limits?" Are you saying strict Kanban minimizes the number of tasks that are in progress in order to prevent overloading the team i.e., there is an…

If you're interested learning more about Kanban, I thing Eric Brechner does a great job of describing it - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CD0y-aU1sXo

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#439
Here is what works:

1. Maintain a To Do list for the project.

2. When a developer is available, he/she/it will pick the highest priority task to work on.

3. Use the To Do list when negotiating new features with stake holders. They have to decide where in the priority list the new task is added.

4. Break very large tasks into smaller step by step tasks that can be developed independently.

It’s simple. It works. I have delivered successful projects most of my career using that method. As a single developer and when managing large teams of developers.

Re: I don’t believe in sprints

#440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Work in Progress". "Strict" Kanban is about minimizing in flight stuff that you don't have bandwidth for. (Strict "traffic limits" based on team size in any specific column.)

Thank you for the clarification, but I am afraid you lost me at this part: > "Strict" Kanban is about minimizing in flight stuff that you don't have bandwidth for. (Strict "traffic limits" based on team size in any specific column.) What is "in flight stuff" and "traffic limits?" Are you saying strict Kanban minimizes the number of tasks that are in progress in order to prevent overloading the team i.e., there is an…

Right, Kanban comes from "just in time" factory needs where you've got scarce supplies that feed scarce resources (particular stations). It started on physical index cards representing "parts" that needed to flow through stations. Each station would pull cards representing the parts they need, but weren't allowed to pull more than they could work with at a time. When "parts" run out new ones need to be ordered. Putting it on a central board was all about finding: what parts are needed where, visualizing which ones run out first, and visualizing where the bottlenecks are. (A lot the parts are stuck waiting on a particular station to pull them and maybe that station is blocked for some reason.) At any point if there is too much in any single column "something is wrong". You are missing a column or work isn't flowing right.

Not all the factory needs apply to Software Kanban, but it's still a useful analogy in various ways. Plus not all software for working with Kanban style boards is great at some of things "Physical Kanban" is better at. (Some of the best times I've worked in Kanban board software was eschewed altogether and it was done in index cards on a whiteboard. There is something to be said about physically moving cards around that the software boards don't quite capture.) While the "raw parts" in Software Kanban are generally considered to "backlog items" (features/stories) and are plentiful rather than scarce (and this is one place where the analogy to factory operations kind of breaks down a little bit), in "strict" Kanban each column or "station" is expected to have somewhat strict limits to keep from overloading the team. Only so many tasks in progress in development at once (often capped at one per developer), only so many tasks in progress in QA testing at once (often capped at one per QA person), etc. You can visualize bottlenecks: if there are too many tasks in Development and not enough for QA, maybe the stories are too big for a steady cadence (Development is your bottleneck); if there are too many tasks in QA instead maybe QA is your bottleneck and you need more QA resources. If you need to scroll a column there's probably a bottleneck to fix (or a column/"station" you are missing).

Setting bandwidth limits, finding your "stations" in your column designs to help find and visualize your bottlenecks, is a lot of the art of Kanban. That and Kanban's focus on "pull" rather than "push" are big differences between Kanban done right and Scrum.

Post reply on HN