•The effectiveness of the... «Scrum. Революционный метод управления проектами»

•The effectiveness of the Scrum framework is rooted in empirical observation of how teams actually operate, informed best practices from leading organizations. Analysis of high-performing teams reveals key factors that distinguish them from others.

This Scrum framework is derived from the rugby concept, where team alignment, shared purpose, and clarity of goals combine to drive progress.

•At its root, Scrum is based on a simple idea: whenever you start a project, why not regularly check in, see if what you’re doing is heading in the right direction, and if it’s actually what people want

•80 percent of the value in any piece of software is in 20 percent of the features, so there’s no such thing as “everything is equally important”

•team’s velocity can improve over time, once they get used to working together and figuring out what was slowing them down

•Every little while, stop doing what you’re doing, review what you’ve done, and see if it’s still what you should be doing and if you can do it better

•if I could create a system that, like that robot, could coordinate independent thinkers with constant feedback about their environment, much higher levels of performance would be achieved

•in business we all too often focus solely on individuals, even if production is a team effort. Think of performance bonuses or promotions or hiring. Everything is focused on the individual actor, rather than the team. And that, it turns out, is a big mistake.

•Managers often focus on hiring the fastest workers, thinking they’ll boost productivity. However, a study of 3,800 projects found that while the best team completed a task in one week, the worst took 2,000 weeks—showing that team performance matters far more than individual speed, even beyond the 10:1 difference in individual work.

•The best-performing teams are cross-functional, autonomous, and transparent, but their success can be derailed by micromanagement, lack of trust, knowledge hoarding, secrecy, unclear goals, and resistance to collaborate. When the performance is measured on the individual level, it introduces competition and hostility. 

•a Scrum team must have full transparency on work, challenges, and progress. In large teams, communication breaks down, sub-teams form, and cross-functionality is lost. Meetings drag on, it becomes harder to keep key information in memory.

•It is the Scrum Master’s job to guide the team toward continuous improvement—to ask, “How can we do what we do better?”

•Milgram experiment showed that no one would have behaved differently than Nazis. Given the right situation, we’re all capable of violence. The experiment highlights that the system, not the individuals, is to blame. Scrum embraces focuses on fixing the system rather than assigning blame to individuals.

•I’d bet that you seldom get feedback on projects until completion. You might be heading completely in the wrong direction for months. In business it could mean the difference between success and failure.

•What did you do yesterday to help the team finish the Sprint? 2. What will you do today to help the team finish the Sprint? 3. What obstacles are getting in the team’s way?

•The thing that cripples communication saturation is specialization—the number of roles and titles in a group. If people have a special title, they tend to do only things that seem a match for that title. And to protect the power of that role, they tend to hold on to specific knowledge

•People don’t multitask because they’re good at it. They do it because they are more distracted. They have trouble inhibiting the impulse to do another activity.” In other words, the people who multitask the most just can’t focus

•if you have two projects, you lose 20% of the time switching between them. If you have five projects, a full 75 percent of your work goes nowhere

•in project after project, people cut and paste the deliverables, but no one actually reads all those thousands of pages.

•I’m not very interested in individual performance; I’m only interested in team performance. I can double a team’s productivity in a month, but an individual? That could take a year.

•When you’re surrounded by assholes, don’t look for bad people; look for bad systems that reward them for acting that way

•I came up with the idea of “Change for Free.” List all the functionality you may implement. The reviewer should take 100 points and give it to individual features down the list.

•There is a part of the Scrum board that is unique to a team: a “Definition of Fun.” Not only does the work have to be complete, they also need to enjoy doing it.