Re^2: Musings: Why do well-intentioned projects go so wrong, so often?

My brain generally clicks-off when people drag out sports-analogies for any reason. Programming isn't a sports-event; it's engineering. (Let the record show, furthermore, that “armchair quarterbacks” actually have no idea how a professional sports team, nor the surrounding business-entity, actually works. They drink the beer, maybe pay $34 for the book, and imagine that they do, getting smarter and smarter as the afternoon wears on.)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Musings: Why do well-intentioned projects go so wrong, so often? by Mutant (Priest) on Dec 06, 2007 at 10:49 UTC
I'm guessing you're referring to the name "Scrum"? Well, it was actually named by a couple of Japanese guys who clearly didn't understand Rugby, because their analogy doesn't make any sense. But at any rate, it's just a name, and the methodology is based on engineering (specifically, lean manufacturing). I suppose they fancied themselves as marketing gurus. The fact that they originally named the Scrum Master role "Hooker" (a position in Rugby) proves they certainly weren't. Anyway, I'd strongly recommend you go past the name and at least look at Scrum (or other Agile methodolgies). Even if you don't want to use it, you may find parts of it interesting and valuable.	[reply]
Re^4: Musings: Why do well-intentioned projects go so wrong, so often? by locked_user sundialsvc4 (Abbot) on Dec 11, 2007 at 00:03 UTC
(Chuckle...) “Hooker?!” ... Umm, is that the sort of person that someone who attaches the moniker “PMP” next to their name is supposed to be managing? (Wink!)