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.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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
Post a Comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more