Comments on: Changing Our Retrospectives http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/ A blog about agile development, quality management, business, and technology Wed, 16 Feb 2011 21:42:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Steve http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/comment-page-1/#comment-111 Steve Fri, 28 May 2010 10:19:19 +0000 http://www.kfurlong.com/?p=144#comment-111 Ken, From my experience, it is always helpful to have a specific agenda for retrospects. One must have topic in my retrospect agenda is to talk about 5 minutes the improvement task team decided to implement last sprint. Did they experience the expected outcome, why or why not (5 why questions)? and change it as necessary. Also, a visual time line of events (that happened during the sprint) is helpful for the developers because it helps them to answer the specific questions during retrospect. Good Luck. Nimat Ken,

From my experience, it is always helpful to have a specific agenda for retrospects. One must have topic in my retrospect agenda is to talk about 5 minutes the improvement task team decided to implement last sprint. Did they experience the expected outcome, why or why not (5 why questions)? and change it as necessary.

Also, a visual time line of events (that happened during the sprint) is helpful for the developers because it helps them to answer the specific questions during retrospect.

Good Luck.
Nimat

]]> By: Maurice le Rutte http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/comment-page-1/#comment-99 Maurice le Rutte Wed, 19 May 2010 08:07:59 +0000 http://www.kfurlong.com/?p=144#comment-99 It is applaudable that you at least notice that the follow up of the retrospective's outcome is insufficient. I've seen teams that do a retrospective (or at least spend some of the company's time under that name) who don't even see that they are not using the outcome. I'm not sure how detailed your agenda is, but dividing the retrospective (≠ meeting) into sections and doing timekeeping is a good idea. Otherwise you'll end up with retrospections where you don't have time to think about 'what shall we do'. You did a lot to make yourself actually do the items, but still you didn't. Have you reflected on the items you created? If you didn't do them they were not the right steps to do. Maybe they were to ambitious, in which case you should look for a smaller step. Maybe they were politically or cultural correct but not what people really wanted, in which case you should work on safety for freedom of speach. Maybe... I'd expect that if you find items that you really care about you'll actually do them and anybody in the team will make sure that they happen. For those who are able read Dutch can also view <a href="http://www.scrummaster.nl/2010/02/06/objects-in-the-rear-view-mirror-are-closer-than-they-appear/" rel="nofollow">my slideshare on retrospectives</a> on my blog. It is applaudable that you at least notice that the follow up of the retrospective’s outcome is insufficient. I’ve seen teams that do a retrospective (or at least spend some of the company’s time under that name) who don’t even see that they are not using the outcome.

I’m not sure how detailed your agenda is, but dividing the retrospective (≠ meeting) into sections and doing timekeeping is a good idea. Otherwise you’ll end up with retrospections where you don’t have time to think about ‘what shall we do’.

You did a lot to make yourself actually do the items, but still you didn’t. Have you reflected on the items you created? If you didn’t do them they were not the right steps to do. Maybe they were to ambitious, in which case you should look for a smaller step. Maybe they were politically or cultural correct but not what people really wanted, in which case you should work on safety for freedom of speach. Maybe…

I’d expect that if you find items that you really care about you’ll actually do them and anybody in the team will make sure that they happen.

For those who are able read Dutch can also view my slideshare on retrospectives on my blog.

]]> By: Ken Furlong http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/comment-page-1/#comment-97 Ken Furlong Tue, 18 May 2010 14:25:42 +0000 http://www.kfurlong.com/?p=144#comment-97 Ilja, thanks for the comment. I'm curious about the idea that a retrospective, because it is supposed to reach a common understanding of what happened, cannot have a prepared agenda. I don't see a necessary connection between reaching new insights and spontaneity. For instance, we ran a retrospective yesterday where one person had asked that we talk about a potential "What went badly," namely, whether or not we "slowed down" towards the end of our sprint. We all discussed it and eventually reached a consensus that we had not and that there was no problem. We didn't go into the meeting with the idea that this was definitely a problem and we needed a solution. Is this in line with what you're envisioning? Ilja, thanks for the comment. I’m curious about the idea that a retrospective, because it is supposed to reach a common understanding of what happened, cannot have a prepared agenda. I don’t see a necessary connection between reaching new insights and spontaneity. For instance, we ran a retrospective yesterday where one person had asked that we talk about a potential “What went badly,” namely, whether or not we “slowed down” towards the end of our sprint. We all discussed it and eventually reached a consensus that we had not and that there was no problem. We didn’t go into the meeting with the idea that this was definitely a problem and we needed a solution. Is this in line with what you’re envisioning?

]]> By: Ken Furlong http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/comment-page-1/#comment-96 Ken Furlong Tue, 18 May 2010 14:21:44 +0000 http://www.kfurlong.com/?p=144#comment-96 Yes, the agenda is based on those three questions, although the "What can we improve" section varies in that sometimes items directly address "What went badly" items and sometimes they are just general improvement ideas. Yes, the agenda is based on those three questions, although the “What can we improve” section varies in that sometimes items directly address “What went badly” items and sometimes they are just general improvement ideas.

]]> By: Paul Boos http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/comment-page-1/#comment-95 Paul Boos Tue, 18 May 2010 14:08:39 +0000 http://www.kfurlong.com/?p=144#comment-95 I'll start with the question; do you use an Agenda different than the 3 questions you posted above? (I don't want to leap that you do or don't have one...) That could be a first start, but even if you do - I would move to the format that Esther Derby and Diana Larsen recommend from "Agile Retrospectives". The primary reason is it will objectively guide you to an important, but easily chewable issue to fix and it will help actually identify the action(s) to be taken. One exercise even invites those to identify who has energy to work the issue, thus finding people who will commit to getting it done. I’ll start with the question; do you use an Agenda different than the 3 questions you posted above? (I don’t want to leap that you do or don’t have one…) That could be a first start, but even if you do – I would move to the format that Esther Derby and Diana Larsen recommend from “Agile Retrospectives”. The primary reason is it will objectively guide you to an important, but easily chewable issue to fix and it will help actually identify the action(s) to be taken. One exercise even invites those to identify who has energy to work the issue, thus finding people who will commit to getting it done.

]]> By: Ilja Preuß http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/comment-page-1/#comment-94 Ilja Preuß Tue, 18 May 2010 13:58:25 +0000 http://www.kfurlong.com/?p=144#comment-94 If you go into the meeting with a prepared agenda, it might be a good meeting, but it's not a retrospective. The purpose of a retrospective is to get a common understanding of what happened, and to generate new insights. It is not primary a problem solving meeting. Sounds to me like you could benefit from incorporating some exercises on gathering data and generating insights into your retrospective. I highly recommend the book "Agile Retrospectives" as a great resource on exercises and retrospective design. If you go into the meeting with a prepared agenda, it might be a good meeting, but it’s not a retrospective. The purpose of a retrospective is to get a common understanding of what happened, and to generate new insights. It is not primary a problem solving meeting.

Sounds to me like you could benefit from incorporating some exercises on gathering data and generating insights into your retrospective. I highly recommend the book “Agile Retrospectives” as a great resource on exercises and retrospective design.

]]> By: Nimat http://www.kfurlong.com/2010/05/07/changing-our-retrospectives/comment-page-1/#comment-93 Nimat Tue, 18 May 2010 13:20:21 +0000 http://www.kfurlong.com/?p=144#comment-93 Ken, From my experience, it is always helpful to have a specific agenda for retrospects. One must have topic in my retrospect agenda is to talk about 5 minutes the improvement task team decided to implement last sprint. Did they experience the expected outcome, why or why not (5 why questions)? and change it as necessary. Also, a visual time line of events (that happened during the sprint) is helpful for the developers because it helps them to answer the specific questions during retrospect. Good Luck. Nimat Ken,

From my experience, it is always helpful to have a specific agenda for retrospects. One must have topic in my retrospect agenda is to talk about 5 minutes the improvement task team decided to implement last sprint. Did they experience the expected outcome, why or why not (5 why questions)? and change it as necessary.

Also, a visual time line of events (that happened during the sprint) is helpful for the developers because it helps them to answer the specific questions during retrospect.

Good Luck.
Nimat

]]>