Anon appreciates Chris Sawyer
Anon appreciates Chris Sawyer
Anon appreciates Chris Sawyer
I bet he did PI planning for a week. Created 132 user stories. Decided on 2 week sprints at a velocity of 27 story points. Had daily 1 hour stand-ups. Weekly 2 hour sprint retro meetings. Per sprint a 3 hour sprint review meetings and a 6 hour grooming session with his cat. Not to forget the bi-weekly 2 hour sprint refinement meetings. And each sprint had a 4 hour backlog meeting on the potty. All by himself.
Are 1 hour (or anything close to it) really a thing that happens? No wonder people hate on scrum then. It's called a stand up because no one wants to stand still for more than 10 minutes and would like to get out of there asap. 😐
I bet its looked something like:
Though just a guess, since my only "experience" with "agile" has been seeing people complain about it. Plus experience working in a large enough team to have experienced the communication problem and to understand that a part of it is with so many meetings that are often irrelevant to the work any individual is working on, the default often ends up being tune most of it out until it's their turn to speak, so they often end up missing relevant stuff anyways and any big meeting is mostly a waste of time.
So the people behind the Agile Manifesto are far more experienced than some random dissatisfied dev. What I think most teams miss is that the only required meeting in the Agile manifesto is to regularly meet up to discuss what has worked and what hasn't the past few weeks, aka retrospective. If there are meetings or processes that don't work for a team and they don't change it after the next retrospective, then they simply aren't agile.