Skip to main content

Accomodate Bug fixing in a scrum sprint- (Scrum or Kanban)

A scrum sprint entirely devoted to bug fixing is very bad. But such situations are not very rare.

Scrum works perfectly with known feature deployment. Bug fixing works better with kanban. Bugs are unknown entity; unless team do some sort of exploration/spike work, they cannot commit on it.

http://www.agileweboperations.com/scrum-vs-kanban.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanban_(development)  

We have adopted a mix of Scrum/Kanban model for fixing bugs.
One of my team is in maintenance. During sprint planning we decide on the priority of the bugs and timebox all the issues based on the teams capacity. During the daily scrum meeting we discuss about the progress made. If the issue is critical, an update is send to the entire team every four hours. If any new issues are reported in between, PO prioritizes that and if it is the highest priority, team stops the work on the current bug and starts fixing the new issue. We encourage multiple people to work on the bugs. Once the top priority bugs are fixed, team moves to the next item in the backlog. If we take more time to fix than the anticipated timebox we inform the PO. Based on the discussion team will continue working on the exiting bug or work on a new higher prioritized bug.

Read the following also

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

PDCA & SCRUM (or Agile); Why is it important?

The PDCA (Plan DO Check Act) cycle was made popular by Dr. W. Edwards Deming. This is a scientific cyclic process which can be used to improve the process (or product). This is cyclic in nature and usually time boxed. Plan  This is the first stage of the process. During this step the team discusses the objectives, the process and the clear conditions of exit (conditions of acceptance). This stage sets the measurable and achievable goals for the team. DO Team works together to achieve the objective set in the planning phase. Team works with the set of agreed process. Check Once the implantation is done team regroups and verifies the output and compares it to the agreed conditions of acceptance decided during the planning phase. The deviation, if any, is noted down. ACT If any deviation in planned tasks is observed during the Check stage, a root cause analysis is conducted. Team brainstorms and identifies the changes required to prevent such deviations in future. Team also

SCRUM- Who should write a user story

Traditionally user stories (or requirements) were written by Business analysts. They used to prepare big documents after months of study. It was a herculean task. I used to get such UI/Functional specification documents. I have fixed a lot of bugs because I missed few text in such 1000 + pages document. This is not the only interesting part. Some of the requirements were so weird that I often wondered why I am creating the features which no one is going to use. If I had the option I would have recommended a better option. If the BA’s misunderstood some requirements & customers failed to correct those few words in the epic requirement then we will have a nice situation. In the agile world the story is different. Product Owners are primarily responsible for user stories. But can anyone else also contribute? Yes. Definitely yes In actual environment many users write user stories. The first requirement may come from end user. The PO, tech architect, scrum master, BA’s... anyone can up

Why is potentially shippable product quality important

Agile teams work in iterations. During this period, they are supposed to work on product increments which can be “delivered” at the end of iteration. But how you know that the correct product was delivered? Many teams have different kinds of acceptance criteria and Definition of Done (DoD). But in many cases, this “done” is not the real “done” there might be some testing pending, some integration or review pending or anything else which prevents the actual use of the product increment. Many of these teams will need additional iterations to finish hardening their products. Many teams will implement different types of “gates” or approval steps to move to next stage. The free flow of product will be interrupted. They might end up doing mini waterfall within their agile process. Many don’t even realize this. This results in poor quality and requires additional effort to “harden” the product. Potentially Shippable Product increment The acceptance criteria and DoD should be modified