This article hopes to help you become a better dancer by exploring some of the principles of agile interactions that I have seen play out on a number of scrum teams. More specifically, we will focus on those interactions necessary to discovering and elaborating requirements within the context of the Scrum framework.
The goal of this article is to share experiences and the model for organizing and operating distributed Agile teams that evolved from these efforts, but the main message is much simpler: Agile is the best way with distributed teams.
While executing Agile projects, many Scrum teams use a "hardening sprint." Do they do so because of issues in the "regular" sprints, or do they plan for it as part of the release? Often teams realize a need for it when the release date approaches. This article maintains that a hardening sprint is not a good idea and highlights why.
A prevailing belief among Agile and Scrum proponents is that “a great deal of explicit risk management becomes unnecessary when a software development project uses an agile approach.” In my experience, this is a false and dangerous assumption. Project risk is a hungry leopard ready to devour the unprepared. Fleet-footed agilists and die-hard waterfallists alike.
To do agile retrospectives, it is important to understand what they are and why you would want to do them. This helps you to facilitate valuable retrospectives and to "sell" retrospectives in your teams and motivate team members to actively and openly take part in them. As a retrospective facilitator it is important to have a toolbox of retrospective exercises which you can use to facilitate a retrospective. This article describes some possible exercises that help you to facilitate retrospectives that deliver benefits to the teams that you work with.
Dual-Track Scrum advocates that the product owner/manager, the lead developer, and the UX/UI person constantly spend their time in the discovery space, while the rest of the team concentrates their efforts in delivery. So, in a nutshell, there are two tracks, each with a different focus but with one aim: to build products customers will love. Sounds good in theory, but it can be hard to find the right balance in practice.