Comments on: The Definition of READY http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/ Thu, 11 Mar 2010 16:23:01 +0100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Serge Beaumont http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-93743 Serge Beaumont Tue, 05 Jan 2010 13:54:28 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-93743 Mandar, I mean the number of story points compared to the team's velocity. For example, if a team has a velocity of 20, you'd want 30-40 points in the Ready buffer by the time you're starting the next Sprint. Mandar,

I mean the number of story points compared to the team’s velocity. For example, if a team has a velocity of 20, you’d want 30-40 points in the Ready buffer by the time you’re starting the next Sprint.

]]> By: Mandy http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-93742 Mandy Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:39:02 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-93742 Hello Serge, Can you please explain what is "1,5-2 Sprint's worth of User Stories" ? Hello Serge,
Can you please explain what is “1,5-2 Sprint’s worth of User Stories” ?

]]> By: The Product Owner Ready Board | Agile Product Owner Blog http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-93031 The Product Owner Ready Board | Agile Product Owner Blog Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:31:40 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-93031 [...] few months back I discovered a blog post that discussed the use of a Ready Board.  The author, Serge Beaumont, lays out a well described [...] [...] few months back I discovered a blog post that discussed the use of a Ready Board.  The author, Serge Beaumont, lays out a well described [...]

]]> By: Armin http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-92892 Armin Thu, 22 Oct 2009 08:10:30 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-92892 Supporting the PO ist exactly the point we struggle with. We wonder whether the PO role should not be split between "strategic PO" and "operative PO". (Note: "we" are software developers and our customer does not have any software know how but a lot of industry know how) operative PO: secures READY and the flow as stated above. Visionary for the platform/product knowing the success factors of e.g. web 2.0. "Are we doing things right?" On site with the team, protects team from customer (disruptions and hiring). Understands business model but cannot propose changes due to lack of industry knowledge. Prioritization based on Cost. strategic PO: Visionary in the industry. Represents stakeholders not (yet) present, e.g. future business partners, clients of their business. "Are we doing the right things?" Should not be on team's location, because tends to be too enthusiastic (moving targets problem). Responsible for the business model. Prioritization based on Value and Risk Prioritization Based on Value, Cost and Risk is taken from the excellent article "First Things First: Prioritizing Requirements" (http://www.processimpact.com/articles/prioritizing.html). What do you think? Supporting the PO ist exactly the point we struggle with. We wonder whether the PO role should not be split between “strategic PO” and “operative PO”. (Note: “we” are software developers and our customer does not have any software know how but a lot of industry know how)

operative PO: secures READY and the flow as stated above. Visionary for the platform/product knowing the success factors of e.g. web 2.0. “Are we doing things right?” On site with the team, protects team from customer (disruptions and hiring). Understands business model but cannot propose changes due to lack of industry knowledge. Prioritization based on Cost.

strategic PO: Visionary in the industry. Represents stakeholders not (yet) present, e.g. future business partners, clients of their business. “Are we doing the right things?” Should not be on team’s location, because tends to be too enthusiastic (moving targets problem). Responsible for the business model. Prioritization based on Value and Risk

Prioritization Based on Value, Cost and Risk is taken from the excellent article “First Things First: Prioritizing Requirements” (http://www.processimpact.com/articles/prioritizing.html).

What do you think?

]]> By: Serge Beaumont http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-92329 Serge Beaumont Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:37:26 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-92329 Hey Jason, glad you liked it. Even I agree with Lars, for that matter :-). What I have found is that by using the DoR and the Ready Kanban (see the other article) I have two powerful, practical and above all teachable tools that really help a new PO get their act together. Not only that, by giving multiple people filling the PO role something they can organize around they start to show the same self-organizing behavior that you see with Scrum teams. Other advantages have been transparency ("Will the Ready buffer be filled in time?", "Is there a stuck user story?") and self-organization across the PO-Team border ("hmm, it's not very useful if we go fast when we're waiting for Ready stories. Let's have one of us help the PO get up to speed..."). Hey Jason, glad you liked it. Even I agree with Lars, for that matter :-) . What I have found is that by using the DoR and the Ready Kanban (see the other article) I have two powerful, practical and above all teachable tools that really help a new PO get their act together. Not only that, by giving multiple people filling the PO role something they can organize around they start to show the same self-organizing behavior that you see with Scrum teams. Other advantages have been transparency (”Will the Ready buffer be filled in time?”, “Is there a stuck user story?”) and self-organization across the PO-Team border (”hmm, it’s not very useful if we go fast when we’re waiting for Ready stories. Let’s have one of us help the PO get up to speed…”).

]]> By: The Definition of READY | The Agile Dood http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-92328 The Definition of READY | The Agile Dood Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:35:41 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-92328 [...] Beaumont posted a great article on the The Definition of READY at Xebia Blog.  While the concept of being ‘ready’ for iteraction planning is already in Scrum, I [...] [...] Beaumont posted a great article on the The Definition of READY at Xebia Blog.  While the concept of being ‘ready’ for iteraction planning is already in Scrum, I [...]

]]> By: Jason http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-92327 Jason Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:12:03 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-92327 Great article Serge. I do agree with Lars that the concept of "ready" is already part of Scrum but like he said, few follow the actually rules. I also like your point that the PO is often forgot about in Scrum. The PO must "be ready" with no real context around how to define ready in the same way teams define done. This is especially true in large organizations (> 1000) where you may have one chief PO but a whole whack of approvals and other "cooks" who need to get their mitts into the stories. Defining ready sets a proper expectation with the rest of the organization and I think it's completely reasonable for a sprint team to push back the same way I expect a PO or customer to expect the team to get to done at the end of the sprint based on their committment. Great article Serge. I do agree with Lars that the concept of “ready” is already part of Scrum but like he said, few follow the actually rules. I also like your point that the PO is often forgot about in Scrum. The PO must “be ready” with no real context around how to define ready in the same way teams define done.

This is especially true in large organizations (> 1000) where you may have one chief PO but a whole whack of approvals and other “cooks” who need to get their mitts into the stories. Defining ready sets a proper expectation with the rest of the organization and I think it’s completely reasonable for a sprint team to push back the same way I expect a PO or customer to expect the team to get to done at the end of the sprint based on their committment.

]]> By: Scrum: Die Position des Teams mit “Ready” stärken » MacPM.net http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-92315 Scrum: Die Position des Teams mit “Ready” stärken » MacPM.net Wed, 19 Aug 2009 21:39:41 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-92315 [...] Beaumont hat auf dem Xebia-Blog dazu einen interessanten und erschöpfenden Beitrag gepostet. Lesenswert! Vertiefende Literatur gibt es ausserdem in Form eines PDFs mit dem schönen [...] [...] Beaumont hat auf dem Xebia-Blog dazu einen interessanten und erschöpfenden Beitrag gepostet. Lesenswert! Vertiefende Literatur gibt es ausserdem in Form eines PDFs mit dem schönen [...]

]]> By: ADSystems – Agile Development Blog » Particione seu Backlog para Quilometragem Máxima http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-92259 ADSystems – Agile Development Blog » Particione seu Backlog para Quilometragem Máxima Fri, 07 Aug 2009 22:04:15 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-92259 [...] acordo com o Serge,o fluxo do “estar preparado” envolve o trabalho do product owner para selecionar NOVAS histórias, deixá-las no [...] [...] acordo com o Serge,o fluxo do “estar preparado” envolve o trabalho do product owner para selecionar NOVAS histórias, deixá-las no [...]

]]> By: Carsten Ruseng Jakobsen http://blog.xebia.com/2009/06/19/the-definition-of-ready/comment-page-1/#comment-92241 Carsten Ruseng Jakobsen Tue, 04 Aug 2009 06:43:47 +0000 http://blog.xebia.com/?p=2045#comment-92241 I find that Serge has done a good job of describing the concept of READY. During 2008 Systematic established the concept of READY, and I will present these expereinces at Agile 2009 together with Jeff Sutherland. The identification of the READY concept came as a solution to flow problems systematically identified with quatitative analysis of Scrum execution. Below you find the links to the article and the slides to be presented. http://agile2009.org/files/session_pdfs/Going%20from%20Good%20to%20Great%20with%20Scrum%20Session.PDF http://agile2009.org/files/ScrumCMMIGoodToGreat.pdf I find that Serge has done a good job of describing the concept of READY.
During 2008 Systematic established the concept of READY, and I will present these expereinces at Agile 2009 together with Jeff Sutherland. The identification of the READY concept came as a solution to flow problems systematically identified with quatitative analysis of Scrum execution.
Below you find the links to the article and the slides to be presented.

http://agile2009.org/files/session_pdfs/Going%20from%20Good%20to%20Great%20with%20Scrum%20Session.PDF

http://agile2009.org/files/ScrumCMMIGoodToGreat.pdf

]]>