So at our company we are utilizing the Scrum development process. As currently only my friends are reading this blog, and none of them have any clue what Scrum is, I feel I must include the obligatory short description of what Scrum is.
Scrum is a management system that says a team works for 30 days on the most important tasks for the product. At the end of those thirty days, you should have a finished product that your ready to ship, which is harder then it sounds. Anyway, back to what this has to do about me.
Today, at our daily stand up meeting, before I even knew what was happening, our sprint was canceled. We are a little stretched thin personnel wise and bodies from our team (namely me) were needed elsewhere to help keep the company on track. There are two ways to take this, one, being that this is a knee jerk reaction by the company to throw resources at their problem. The other is to think of this as addressing a problem in its infancy so that there is not a major screw-up down the road.
Currently I’m on the latter, but others on the team were of the opinion it was the former. This change seems like something an Agile company should be able to accomplish, but in my view, software development is just not able to be truly agile. Going from one task to another, requires huge amounts of knowledge transfer, gathering a mental image of the structures and environment this task. With this built in margin of time between switches, is it possible for a programmer to be all that agile? Is he not more lumbering?
So if we thought of developers instead of agile lithe dancers, but lumbering mainframes, would we be more cognisant of the productivity and limits of a developers output?