DEV Community

Discussion on: Do we need standup?

Collapse
 
zevenberge profile image
Zevenberge

We went from a "minimal meeting rule" to a more structural approach with stand-ups, planning and so forth. It really benefited our project.

Before the revert to common agile, the project was in chaos. Twice a day priorities changed. We had no idea what the status on our projects was. When a feature was done, the feature was actually just started. It resulted in feature branches of 3 months worth of work, which were impossible to review in a merge request, created a weekly Git hell and in the end were buggy and still feature incomplete.

Because we need to plan our sprints, we now need to specify the requirements on an issue. If something is not in the definition of done, it is out of scope for that issue. In this case the sum of its parts is less than the total (regarding amount of work).

We've gone back to agile for the short period of three sprints now. However, I feel like we've been more productive in the last month than the half year before that.

I agree that teams shouldn't do agile because the book says so. It works for our team. It might not work for another team.