Came late and sat in two of the discussions at the Agile Singapore meetup – I mostly kept quiet, but picked up some of the interesting points. These are some of my notes, so excuse the brevity and lack of structure.
- Measuring and judging productivity for the purpose of rewards. The assumption around people metrics is that every person can be measured equally. Similarly, some metrics do not judge fairly, especially the old school ones – no. of hours, no. of lines of code. Even for no. of bugs solved – does no. of bugs in the first place point to poor code? What if the person solving them caused the bugs in the first place? People may start “optimising” for the metrics. But how do you reward people? How about don’t reward them? No bonuses – if you want a pay raise, bring it up to the team and they decide. Shouldn’t your team instead be driven by intrinsic, rather than extrinsic motivations? The team would also be self-moderating, dealing with members who were underperforming. How about more traditional measures? Perhaps still possible through peer review, and also leaving the final decision to someone else other than the boss so there is some impartiality.
- Non-iterative Agile. Is it possible to push out features one by one rather than as together as an iteration? So each dev is working on his/her own schedule and they either release separately or together. How do you break the sprints then? Perhaps still have it as weekly, but deploy what you can (the partially done work could be toggled off, for example). Technically should be feasible as long as there are no dependencies.
All in all, quite an eye-opener for me. Pizza was good too. Looking forward to the next one!