Comments on: #notkanban http://availagility.co.uk/2009/04/09/notkanban/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=notkanban Karl Scotland - Using Agile to Deliver Value Mon, 14 May 2012 03:22:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Vasco Duarte http://availagility.co.uk/2009/04/09/notkanban/comment-page-1/#comment-92 Vasco Duarte Sun, 03 May 2009 04:59:55 +0000 http://availagility.wordpress.com/?p=279#comment-92 It's interesting how we are using the same arguments against Kanban that were used in the past against Agile. "people see no documentation, no process, no accountability..." I'd have one recommendation for Boris, please execute Kanban for a reasonable amount of time and then improve it (based on retrospective events and improvement actions/tasks). After a few iterations of Kanban + retrospectives analyze the results. You'll probably be pleasantly surprised with the results you get. Scrum was also seen as a worst process (yes process) than others at the time when it was introduced. How quickly we forget... It’s interesting how we are using the same arguments against Kanban that were used in the past against Agile. “people see no documentation, no process, no accountability…”

I’d have one recommendation for Boris, please execute Kanban for a reasonable amount of time and then improve it (based on retrospective events and improvement actions/tasks). After a few iterations of Kanban + retrospectives analyze the results. You’ll probably be pleasantly surprised with the results you get.

Scrum was also seen as a worst process (yes process) than others at the time when it was introduced. How quickly we forget…

]]> By: Boris Gloger http://availagility.co.uk/2009/04/09/notkanban/comment-page-1/#comment-93 Boris Gloger Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:57:17 +0000 http://availagility.wordpress.com/?p=279#comment-93 Oh, one more ... yes of course my interpretation of KANBAN is wrong. I do not express, what I believe KANBAN is, I try to express that I do believe KANBAN, although it looks very promising is the wrong direction, as Scrum Typ C is the wrong direction. More about this on my blog in the next days. btw --- I love this discussion. We need much more of this. Best Regards Boris Oh, one more … yes of course my interpretation of KANBAN is wrong. I do not express, what I believe KANBAN is, I try to express that I do believe KANBAN, although it looks very promising is the wrong direction, as Scrum Typ C is the wrong direction. More about this on my blog in the next days.

btw — I love this discussion. We need much more of this.

Best Regards

Boris

]]> By: Boris Gloger http://availagility.co.uk/2009/04/09/notkanban/comment-page-1/#comment-94 Boris Gloger Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:35:47 +0000 http://availagility.wordpress.com/?p=279#comment-94 Hi Karl, thanks for all these clarifications. And I agree, of course the intend of all what you and the others evangelists of KANBAN are doing is based on the values of agile. I only believe that the direction it heads is wrong. It brings software development more near to the industrialization of brain work than it is already. The next logical step is KANBAN driven software factories. Scrum and agile was always very clear about that Scrum is not a tool, not a process not a new silver bullet. I am sure that you and Clark know all this and that you try to improve the adaptation of the core ideas. But people only see: Cool -- less planning, no iterations, now I do not need to wait, now I do not need to be prepared, now I do not need to commit, now I do not need to work together, as I do have my own column I can work in .... Maybe I am too pesimistic? Boris Hi Karl,

thanks for all these clarifications. And I agree, of course the intend of all what you and the others evangelists of KANBAN are doing is based on the values of agile. I only believe that the direction it heads is wrong. It brings software development more near to the industrialization of brain work than it is already. The next logical step is KANBAN driven software factories.

Scrum and agile was always very clear about that Scrum is not a tool, not a process not a new silver bullet.

I am sure that you and Clark know all this and that you try to improve the adaptation of the core ideas. But people only see:

Cool — less planning, no iterations, now I do not need to wait, now I do not need to be prepared, now I do not need to commit, now I do not need to work together, as I do have my own column I can work in ….

Maybe I am too pesimistic?

Boris

]]>