[xmlWiki-developers] Fw: What do you think of the following?

[Arnaldo C. <ar...@mi...>]

Almost forgot that Hugo asked me to forward this to the group during our
meeting last night.
--Arnaldo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hugo Garcia" <xm...@ne...>
To: <ar...@mi...>
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 2:03 PM
Subject: Re: What do you think of the following?


> around Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 5:09:48 PM, Laurent Bossavit wrote:
>
>
>  > I'd like to ask for more information on this from Ron, or anyone
>  > who's had experience providing XP coaching services or XP-related
>  > consulting services : exactly what does a "professional" XP coach do,
>  > and how does he/she work ?
>
>
> Project assessments: look at the process and see how people are doing,
> what the consultant observes, recommendations.
>
> Coaching: close in, essentially daily presence, supporting the
> process, teaching the process over and over, helping to adjust.
>
> Coaching: visits every couple of weeks or a month, typically at
> iteration end/begin, observe results, help with retrospectives, help
> figure out what happened and what to do about it.
>
> Mentoring: help team learn specific techniques, pair programming, OO
> design, language, tools, ...
>
>
>  > Are you usually called upon specifically to coach teams in XP, or to
>  > provide other consulting services ?
>
>
> Most good consultants see their job as helping, not pushing a specific
> practice, so they will provide whatever help they can in whatever
> form. This will typically be consistent with the basic values of the
> consultant. So don't expect me to help you get to CMM 5.
>
>
>  > Who decides to retain an XP
>  > coach, and for what reasons ?
>
>
> Someone in management who can write a large check. (No, not kidding,
> this stuff is fairly expensive. Even a couple of days of a junior XP
> coach would cost a few thousand dollars.)
>
> Usually in my experience someone one or more levels above a small
> group project manager. Often CTO or equivalent.
>
>
>  > Do you usually start by diagnosing the
>  > existing process, or other aspects of the business such as management
>  > style and structure, or just get right down to coaching in the
>  > practices ?
>
>
> Depends. I think an assessment is always appropriate. If one isn't
> done up front, the consultant will be building it incrementally over
> time anyway ...
>
>
>  > How long, typically, are such coaching engagements - what do you
>  > usually expect to achieve over these periods ?
>
>
> All over the map, from a one-week immersion course to 90 or 180 days
> of full-time or nearly full-time coaching.
>
> Achievements from "provide information or training" to "get us actually
> doing XP" to "get us as productive as we can be".
>
>
>  > Are there cases where
>  > you'd recommend against installing XP ?
>
>
> Yes. Mostly social issues like desire to develop the software
> offshore. Usually complex questions. Often XP needs to be customized,
> which is one of the biggest values of a very experienced coach.
>
>
>  > E.g. is there a minimum of
>  > team expertise required in, say, OO design or coding for the
>  > engagement to be worthwhile ?
>
>
> Total dolts are probably not a productive target. If they can program
> competently, they probably are. Some technical training might be
> recommended as things go on.
>
> How's that for an off-the-top-of-the-head reply? Does it help?
>
> Ron Jeffries
> www.XProgramming.com
> XP says: Don't just sit on your DUF, do something. Get some feedback.
>
> AND =================================
>
> Speaking of XP consultants, isn't *anyone* going to answer my
>  >questions about what XP consultants actually do ? I'll repost them
>  >for easy reference :
>
>
> Laurant,
>
> We coach rather than consult.  For many folks, coaching implies team while
> consulting implies high prices and little results.
>
> We do something called the Agility Assessment
> (http://industriallogic.com/xp/assessment.html).   We recommend this
> service to companies that are considering going agile or extreme.  It is a
> good way for them to explore whether or not they could have success with
an
> agile method.  We negotiate the number of days needed for the assessment -
> which can vary from 2 days to 2 weeks.  As a case in point, I just spoke
> with a company about doing this service after it became clear that they
> were very interested in xp, but weren't sure they could do it.  They
agreed
> to purchase the assessment.  I expect that it will help them decide how
> best to proceed through the agile landscape.
>
> We also provide a service called the Extreme Exchange
> (http://industriallogic.com/xp/exchange.html) in which two of us coach a
> team for weeks at a time.  Our goal is to help the team fully implement
the
> xp practices and mentor a new coach so we can move on.  We find that by
> pair-coaching, we're smarter than any one of us.   We've had good results
> with this service.
>
> Professional coaching also involves knowing when a company needs or
doesn't
> need training.  When they do, two of us (who've coached and programmed on
> xp projects) coach a team through 5 intensive days of xp training --
called
> The eXtreme Programming Workshop
> (http://industriallogic.com/training/xpw.html).   We continue to not offer
> a 1-day or 2-day or smaller version of this workshop, because most teams
> need 5 full days to really get it.  We also find that the games and
> simulations we use in the workshop help people educate their colleagues
who
> could not attend the training.
>
> Finally, we've speculated that companies could use help on
> Release/Iteration planning or Iteration Retrospectives - but to date, we
> haven't had takers for those services.
>
> hope that helps,
> jk
>
> I n d u s t r i a l  L o g i c , I n c .
> Joshua Kerievsky
> Founder, Extreme Programmer & Coach
> http://industriallogic.com
> 510-540-8336
>
>
>
> ar...@mi... wrote:
>
> > Well, I must say that my vote would be for Jim.  I think he's already
> > basically doing the job.  But, I think it's certainly worth bringing up.
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Hugo Garcia" <xm...@ne...>
> > To: <ar...@mi...>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 1:28 PM
> > Subject: Re: What do you think of the following?
> >
> >
> >
> >>Well, I will leave it to your discression to decide if you want to
> >>forward to the group email or if you want to bring it up in the group
> >>discussion.
> >>
> >>Something in the lines as :
> >>
> >>Hugo stays as Customer and Developer (we are one odd person in the
> >>group) which seems to work. Someone else take the role of coach. Mi vote
> >>goes for Arnaldo.
> >>
> >>-H
> >>
> >>ar...@mi... wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Hugo,
> >>>    I think that there is defintely some strong cause for consideration
> >>>
> > in
> >
> >>>your thoughts, and that (if you're OK with it) we should discuss this
> >>>tomorrow night with the entire group.  If people agree with you, the
> >>>
> > logical
> >
> >>>outcome would be to assign someone else to be coach (while you continue
> >>>
> > as
> >
> >>>customer) and this is something that is certainly up to the group to
> >>>
> > decide.
> >
> >>>--Arnaldo
> >>>----- Original Message -----
> >>>From: "Hugo Garcia" <xm...@ne...>
> >>>To: <ar...@mi...>
> >>>Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:50 AM
> >>>Subject: What do you think of the following?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>One way of making the customer responsible.
> >>>>
> >>>>My argument is particular to projects that are started by a developer
or
> >>>>a group of developers where there is no non technical customer. I
think
> >>>>that as long as the developer who is wearing the customer hat makes
sure
> >>>>to write the user stories AND to write the acceptance test before she
> >>>>goes ahead to code will be able to start on the path of having the
> >>>>self-dicipline to stick to XP.
> >>>>
> >>>>If there is a team of developers then it seems that the best bet is to
> >>>>assign a Developer to be a Customer and another to be a Coach. Mixing
> >>>>the roles doesn't seem to work because the Customer/Coach duality
gives
> >>>>to much power to one person (leading to such nasties as
> >>>>micro-management). But, curiosly enough the developer that is the
> >>>>Customer can succesfully pair program as long as that developer does
not
> >>>>do any large scope design. It seems that the check and balances of
> >>>>normal XP are altered and it is the check and balances of the
> >>>>distributed team that are not well categorized.
> >>>>
> >>>>-H
> >>>>
> >>>>PS I based my comment on the ongoing project I am involve in
> >>>>http://xmlwiki.sourcefore.net
> >>>>
> >>>>ron...@ac... wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>Around Tuesday, November 13, 2001, 12:00:11 PM, Bryan Dollery wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I think that this is a particularly dangerous practice. By agreeing
> >>>>>>
> >>>>to 'be
> >>>>
> >>>>>>the customer' a developer is absolving the customer of
> >>>>>>
> >>>>responsibility, and
> >>>>
> >>>>>>this is a bad thing.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>I agree with your remarks. Right on!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Ron Jeffries
> >>>>>www.XProgramming.com
> >>>>>It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare,
> >>>>>it is because we do not dare that they are difficult. --Seneca
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>To Post a message, send it to:   ext...@eG...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> >>>>>
> >>>>ext...@eG...
> >>>>
> >>>>>ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> >>>>>
> >>>>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
>
>