An important part of naming is that it leads to understanding. Without naming we can’t build a shared understanding of what we are doing and grow our knowledge. The real value is going to come when we start specifying the capabilities, the distinctions in specific implementations, and start figuring out what works best in which contexts.

Scrum and XP just provide a good set of practices/roles/rules to start with. Then you should forget about strict methodology and follow your goal (super-productive development team).

hahaha, thank you! I think sometimes it’s easier to blindly follow a cloud because it already exists (someone has already figured out the rules for us) then it is to stop and THINK about what is actually best for us at this particular point in time.

Thanks for the reminder that thinking & adapting is always the Right Answer :-)

Too often people miss the point. It is a set of technique that is meant to be adapted as appropriate for the situation. You know, that ole hammer / nail thing. Oops maybe it is a screw.

I do feel there is value in naming things. It isn’t just about wanting to be better than another named thing, it is about creating identity. I associate myself with Scrum, because everything about it, including its ludicrous name, speaks to me of irreverence, of improved personal relationships at work, of true self-organization, of trust and courage.

As soon as people talk of Scrum as a process they have lost the plot. It isn’t. It is a mindset, a way of thinking and behaving that fundamentally challenges everything we have previously thought was correct. I don’t see Kanban having that same change-the-world focus, it seems to be about moving cards across a wall (I guess I may be missing some detail, but really I don’t hear much else about Kanban).

Scrum might be a named cloud, some day to dissolve, but while it is here it is very beautiful to behold.

There are no “best” practices, me-htinks. rather, good practices applied practically and appropriately.

thanks for bringing this to the surface,
~ ellen

First, the logic: Offering certification does not imply that one topic area is better than another. Does the fact that PMI offers certification imply that the PMI’s ideas are best? I hope to hell not.

Second, the question of why Scrum offers certification: As I see it, certification is a way of marketing ideas, and it has turned out to be a very good one in the case of Scrum.

Third, one might wonder why I would take part in this. The answers are two: My class is a good way of helping interested people do better with software development, and I make a little money at it, which permits me to continue to do what I do. See also my reply to Keith, above.

Fourth, as to why the cloud, community, tribe bans people: The cloud, community, tribe do not ban people. Ken Schwaber, an individual, has banned some people from the Scrum Development list, including you, and me. To the best of my knowledge he does that when people persist in asking questions that he thinks are inappropriate to the mailing list. As he is the moderator of that list, that is his right. It may reflect upon him but it does not reflect on the community at large.

Finally, let me refer you again to the story of the monks who encounter a woman who needs to cross the stream. I put her down a long time ago, and I recommend the same to you.

Thanks for stopping by!

I think my mission is to go where the questions are, and to speak the truth as I understand it. It seems to be working fairly well so far.

As a CST I have the responsibility to give the participants all that I can on the subject of how to do software development well. I find that they are interested in learning that material and that they generally rate the class as quite useful.