• (nodebb)

    Or

    "great, we'll start work in two weeks after we have resolved the P1 bug".

    Why wouldn't that work?

  • Hrolf (unregistered) in reply to jeremypnet

    My guess is that story approval is the start point for their cycle time metric.

  • TheCPUWizard (unregistered)

    Either use personsa's or don't -- either is fine... but if you ARE going to use them, then use them so they provide REAL value...

    Let's assume they are being used.... Stories->Tasks->Commits->Tests->CodeCoverage->Bugs->Remediations...

    Then someone proposes something that will change a method in a given class.... From the tests we know what test--cases could be impacted... We track that back to the user-stories... We aggregate by the Persona(s)...

    Now we know who will be impacted... No need for all the stakeholders, just those in the filtered group [oh, and 99.9% of this can be done asynchronously in a modern tool without the need for heavy discussions in meetings]

  • Vera (unregistered) in reply to jeremypnet

    Because that would make Brian the 'roadblock.' Right now, Steve's 'improper' user story is a convenient excuse for Brian to reject new work, without having to admit to any potential mismanagement.

  • Hal (unregistered) in reply to jeremypnet

    That works in a small organization or at least one where everyones interests are well aligned to the overall success. It does not work so well in larger orgs where.

    Renee's evaluation is tied to the development and delivery of the new product; she couldn't care less about bugs in the previous release.

    Brian - will get a large blackmark if a bug in the existing product isn't addressed in a timely fashion, he will also be blamed if the work stalls on the new release UNLESS he can point the finger at someone like Renee and say well they never provided appropriate specifications.

    This is just the reality of working in larger organizations especially where the overall success of the business is not tied to a single activity, supporting the existing product may or may not be as big a priority for the organization as the new release. Brian might even be acting in the best interest of the org overall for all we know. Maybe that bug is P1 because their largest customer is hitting it and their deciding not renew or not to license version 2 when it is delivered would be major hit. Maybe he knows Renees personal success though is only tied to the new release and she's going to press for resources to be allocated to that immediately, so he made her the blocker to shut that down.

    The sad reality is success in the modern corporation means engaging in a certain amount of posturing and BSing.

  • Syed Ashrafulla (github)

    Sad to see a symptom of an organization whose units clearly cannot trust or be honest with each other. Instead of working together under the constraints of the engineering team being swamped, the organization now just distrusts each other.

    Poor Brian, I hope Brian gets good feedback in terms of being more forthcoming with the legitimate reasons to push back against new work.

  • (nodebb)

    This is why I'm glad I am no longer in the industry. There have been many answers to my original post and they all boil down to "in most organisations, it is better to lie for your own sake than tell the truth".

    That's the true ETF.

    Addendum 2024-02-18 14:50: *WTF.

  • (nodebb)

    https://www.deepl.com/uk/translator

    Addendum 2024-02-26 15:59: https://www.deepl.com/uk/translator

Leave a comment on “A Stalled Upgrade”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article