Skip to main content

The importance of having regular retrospectives

Over a period of time retrospectives because a mundane task and teams starts skipping this, some of the patterns I have observed.
  • Do a retrospective for 2-3 sprints
  • Repeat the pattern of retrospectives without any value addition to the team 
  • Not doing the retrospectives at all. 
Before the question of skipping retrospectives (or not doing altogether) arises we have to understand what we are trying to accomplish with retrospectives. Agile methodology thrives on inspect and adapt process. We continuously observe and make changes in our process for continuous improvement. Retrospective is the key event which facilitates this. There is no benefit in doing retrospectives without understanding this core principle. There is no value in forcing this down the team if they don’t understand the core benefits. They should see some value for time they spend on this. It shouldn't be because the process dictates or because the scrum master wants it. If this is not happening then do a retrospective of the retrospective.
  • Create a visible backlog of the action items created from retrospective. I prefer it in a separate task board. 
  • People should be able to see the progress. This will be the scrum masters backlog of impediments. One of the biggest complaint teams raise is that nothing happens to the action items in retrospectives.
  •  Assign people to each action items and review the progress periodically. 
  • Team might want to skip this because they might get bored with the same format and type of discussions. 
    • Do infuse creativity 
    • Put some new activities or discussions. 
    • Change the venue or style. 
  • This meeting is not only about finding impediments or feedback for continuous improvement. I have used this ceremony for improving people–people communication and building trust. 
  • Get a copy of Agile Retrospectives: Making Good Teams Great http://www.amazon.com/Agile-Retrospectives-Making-Teams-Great/dp/0977616649 
  • With some teams you don’t have to even do retrospectives after every sprint. They do it daily or after some major event. The feedback cycle for such teams is very short and they should be matured enough to understand this. I will recommend this only for matured team who are together for long 
If you are not having retrospectives or are not doing it regularly then also you might deliver what is expected by you but you wont be delivering using Agile principles. You will not improve continuously and will fade away like dinosaurs.

Once Nokia were the number one company in their domain but  now that space is occupied by Apple and Samsung. I don't even have to mention the problems faced by Black berry... to survive in this competition you will have to continuously improve.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

What are the rules of scrum?

A relatively new person to scrum asked me this question last day. My answer to that person was yes. But really does the scrum have any rules? Scrum is a framework which helps us in developing software. It has very few rules and apart from those basic rules rest of them are guidelines like best practices. Some of the rules  The roles of Scrum • Scrum Master -  http://www.theagileschool.com/2012/03/scrummasters-checklist-roles.html • Product Owner • Feature Team The PDCA cycle ( http://www.theagileschool.com/2012/05/pdca-scrum-or-agile-why-is-it-important.html  )  frequent communication about risks (daily) • Plan – Sprint planning • Do – Actual engineering sprint – deliver a potential shippable code • Check – Sprint review • Act – Retrospective  The scrum guide @ http://www.scrum.org/Scrum-Guides will be a good guideline for teams/companies planning to start scrum. If you are following the recommendation in these then you are following scrum. Apart from these rest of

Product Backlog: Should you write everything in user story format?

I like user stories a lot. They help everyone talk the same language and results in a better product. User story alone does not constitute product requirement. User story is supposed to be a place holder for discussion which should happen between the team, Product Owner and the customer. This discussion result in a common understanding which along with the user story content is the product requirement. This format captures the essence of requirement without confusing the readers User Story is only one of the many different ways in which requirements can be represented. This is not mandatory in any Agile “process”. But many have made this mandatory. I have seen many spending countless hours trying to write the requirements in user story format when they could have easily written that in simple one-line sentence in few minutes.   I have seen team members refusing to even discuss the requirement until product owner rewrote the requirement in user story format. Once I