Nathan Borror on the ‘Scrum’:
About 80% of the meetings I’ve ever attended have included at least five people. Any meeting over three becomes a presentation while one bloviates and others wander. #
Scrumming on the other hand, which you can read more about in Nathan’s entry and comments, sound delightfully light and concise.
Look at me. I’ve begun blogging about meeting structures and the like… What the!?…
We use Scrum (the process, and the meetings) in our magazine staff. It is an agile process designed for software development, so we’ve had to adapt it. It works well for us.
You should really read up on Stand-up meetings if you like this part of the agile development process:
- Daily Stand up meetings.
– It’s Not Just Standing Up: Patterns of Daily Stand-up Meetings.
Thanks for helping spread the word :) The problem lies in conniving Account Management of a large agency that a scrum will suffice… or maybe the problem is Account Management.
Wow. Scrumming sounds so much better than the 2.5 hour research meetings we have every week where I get to contribute about ten words in total.
It has it’s very own set of downfalls and places ripe for abuse as well. Coming from the agile software development world I can only say this: watch out for managers or people who do things just ‘because they’re supposed to’.
“Well scrum demands that we have to do this like this … “
Your system or framework should fit your requirements. Not vice versa and I have seen recently ‘born-again’ scrummers apply patterns simply because they are supposed to rather than what makes logical sense.