tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12948038.post5113689747850274264..comments2023-07-29T09:15:17.416+01:00Comments on allan's blog - Agile & Digital Business: Running Scope creep backwardsallan kellyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06262139490250478379noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12948038.post-9251169289089754022010-11-24T20:31:33.922+00:002010-11-24T20:31:33.922+00:00I recently have accepted a position with a company...I recently have accepted a position with a company who practices Lean. If I hear "Scope Creep" one more time I will shoot myself. It comes out of their mouths like old tape loops. The bottom line is that once you start declaring scope creep, you squelch ideas. People are concerned they might be tagged the bad guy when the project or in this case, the Kaizen fails. Most devistating cost or time issues don't result from scope creep...they result from ineffective Project and Lean Leaders.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12948038.post-23556612363688851872009-01-20T16:44:00.000+00:002009-01-20T16:44:00.000+00:00Interesting backup material to this blog post: Req...Interesting backup material to this blog post: <A HREF="http://www.featuredrivendevelopment.com/node/614?PHPSESSID=32e8acdacdab3d89c51afd9c53019607" REL="nofollow">Requirements - The Budgeting Syndrome</A>.Immo Hünekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17107000566759440656noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12948038.post-46755725150628548612009-01-19T21:18:00.000+00:002009-01-19T21:18:00.000+00:00I see the same thing with respect to the must have...I see the same thing with respect to the must have's.<BR/><BR/>If you imagine a story as a picture of a person set in a field, with mountains in the background (bear with me). <BR/><BR/>In the beginning everybody wants the person's face to be detailed down to every wrinkle, the field to show each individual flower and the mountains to have snow and goats on them.<BR/><BR/>As the agile project gets under way and the constraints kick in the story get's scoped down. This means in version 1 the person has an outline of hair, details eyes, nose outline, details mouth and no ears. The fields have 2 types of flowers, one drawn only a a circle on a stick, the other immaculately detailed. The mountains are just an outline.<BR/><BR/>This means version 1 is still definitely recognisable as a person in a field - although only of interest to the people closest to the person in the picture.<BR/><BR/>Then in version 1.5, 2, 2.5 the things that were lacking get drawn in and eventually (hopefully) everyone want to look at the picture.<BR/><BR/>actually that might be a bit of a crazy metaphor, but it helps me think about how to scope things down. For instance, often there is a tradeoff to be made between having 5 features of a face as outlines, or having 2 as outlines, 2 as detailed painting and one completely left out.Edward Heretschhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06905153355475532220noreply@blogger.com