Hi Joe,
I agree with you, the Nokia test is an excellent place to start. Yes,
it's a blunt instrument and it's not perfect. Personally, I would
change point two from "Is software tested and working" to "Is there a
definition of done which is consistently applied?" Still, as first
test, it is simple and easy to apply.
If a team scores 7 or 8, they have probably thought about Scrum and
made a serious effort to implement it. If they only scored 7, there is
probably a reason. (I speak from experience - I have been involved in
two major projects, one scored a 7, the other an 8. Why was one project
a seven? Because the customer ordered HTML templates from us, not
working code, so there was nothing to test. We did have a definition of
done though. So in my opinion, we were doing Scrum.).
So if the team scores 6 or less, then they probably need to work on the
basics and may need some remedial Scrum training. The team that scores
7 or 8 may need some coaching, but they are surely on the right track.
In public health, there is a distinction between screening tests and
diagnostic tests. Screening tests are potentially given to large
numbers of people. Ideally, they should be cheap and produce few false
negatives, so infected persons don't slip through, but they may produce
false positives.
So the Nokia test is our screening test. A basic check of the health of
the team and the Scrum process. The "Stevens Cut": 6 or less and you're
not doing Scrum. A 7 or 8 doesn't guarrantee that the team is doing
Scrum, but that a closer look is merited to see how the team is doing.
Diagnostic tests are given to a much smaller number of people: only
those
who turned up positive on the screening test, in our case, those who
pass the Stevens Cut. So they can be much more expensive
and/or require specialized training and equipment to perform. However
this test should produce few if any false negatives.
What then is the diagnostic test for Scrum teams?
I think this is where the"Little" test comes in. It should complement,
not replace the Nokia test. It would ask more questions and probe
deeper (which will prevent it from being used as
quick poll
on my blog though
). In short, the Little test should not assess
whether the team is doing Scrum, but how well the team is doing Scrum.
My candidate topics for the Little test:
- Scrummaster/servant leadership
- Daily Scrum
- Retrospectives
- Impediment handling
- Interfaces outside of team, e.g. customer and organization
- Protection of Team from Management and Customer
Cheers,
Peter
Joseph Little schrieb:
>
> Peter,
>
> Thanks! I think it is good if people think about the Nokia Test
more.
>
> The Nokia Test does not address every issue. It is a blunt
> instrument. It is the thinking that we want most.
>
> When you don't get a perfect score (and very many won't), ask
> yourself: Why did we think we could live without that? And why
would
> Nokia think it was essential?
>
> If it were my test, I would ask if the team has an Impediments List
> and knocks down one impediment per week. As one small example. But
> then, I think people rightly might pay more attention to a Nokia
Test
> than a Little Test.
>
> Thanks, Joe
>
> CST --
> Blog: Agile & Business
> leanagiletraining.com
--
Peter Stevens, CSM
http://scrum-breakfast.blogspot.com
http://fingerspell.sierra-charlie.com
tel: +41 44 586 6450
__._,_.___
__,_._,___
RSS Feed