| I'm getting the impression that it's like Monopoly -- an overall solid idea that some people glue their own pet ideas to, or where they tack on pointless add-ons until it becomes unrecognizable. I don't really see what's hateable in scrum, when done sensibly. Like what do you have? 1. Daily short, standup meetings just to make sure everyone is on the same page, nobody is terminally stuck, and everything is moving forward. Most of the time these are done in a few minutes and go by completely uneventfully. 2. Weekly plannings where the team figures out what to do next. That allows replying to real-world changes, or to adapt to team composition. Eg, if Bob, who knows everything there is about Postgres is on vacation, maybe we'll delay database related work until he returns. 3. Retrospective to see if everything is on track or things are getting badly bogged down somewhere. This is a good time to think about whether some feature will not make it at this rate, or such. I don't think there's anything wrong with the core idea, and there's a lot you can adjust to your needs. If doing two week sprints is too much planning for you because all the tickets are long running, do it once a month instead. |