Randy Lerner

[brian green]

My daughter's booze, farm produce and air B and B business is growing exponentially.  My recruitment two question interview I like to think has played a big part it driving the business forward.  As previously posted we ask potential staff "are you an Aston Villa fan?" or "are you prepared to become an Aston Villa fan?". Works a treat.  Makes them think on their feet there and then.

Two days ago on my return from a markets run I was asked to adjudicate on a borderline accountancy applicant.  We had to use the back up questionnaire.  I, as the resident crabby old bastard put the two back up questions "can you fight?" and "do you like fishing?". He failed the first question by replying "I don't know" but did very well on the second by replying "yes, I go with my Dad".  Good spotting on his part of our family ethos in the business.  Got the job.  Whatever the system it has to find and encourage those who think on their feet.

[mr underhill]

I suppose the alternative questions, without the need to name check the Villa,  could be 'Are you a Birmingham City supporter?' and 'Would you ever consider becoming a Birmingham City supporter?' Affirmative answers to either would automatically rule the candidate out.

[Jimbo]

I suppose the alternative questions, without the need to name check the Villa,  could be 'Are you a Birmingham City supporter?' and 'Would you ever consider becoming a Birmingham City supporter?' Affirmative answers to either would automatically rule the candidate out.

Just check for skinless knuckles.

[brian green]

Agree Mr U.  Any question that takes them completely by surprise would serve.  We favour the Villa questions because it prepares the successful ones for Monday mornings of hair tearing, garment rending and turnip throwing.

[edgysatsuma89]

I suppose the alternative questions, without the need to name check the Villa,  could be 'Are you a Birmingham City supporter?' and 'Would you ever consider becoming a Birmingham City supporter?' Affirmative answers to either would automatically rule the candidate out.

Just check for skinless knuckles.

That's gross. It would really hurt when he forward roles.

Sonic the hedgehog banter. Never gets old.

[DaveD]

I don't know much about lean, but - talking of Toyota originated systems - we have what we call "an evolving agile environment" in our place.

So, we talk loads about agile and scrum, and some of it, we do - stand ups, backlog planning, sprints - but so much of it is totally impractical in our place that it becomes really unrecognisable as scrum. It's just a pick and mix of stuff we can and can't do.

I had to go on a certified scrum master training course before christmas (all management have to - despite us never having to function as scrum masters).

Within the first hour, the trainer started telling us how, if we didn't have our product owner embedded with the team full time, it just wasn't ever going to work as it "isn't scrum". I asked her what the fuck we're meant to do if that can't ever happen within our structure (at our place, it can't) and the answer was to just keep on asking people until it did happen. Marvellous.

I'm pretty sure that at our place the efficiency savings which we make through our bastardised version of scrum are all spunked away in the time we waste talking about scrum / debating whether we're ever going to be agile / evangelising scrum to others in the company.

The easiest way for consultants to improve things at our place would be to come in with AK-47s and a helpful member of staff pointing out the colleagues we could do without.

Oh God, that sounds depressingly familiar.

I've worked on 3 agile projects, one worked very well, one was a bit half-assed but achieved something, and one was a total disaster. It really is all about the product owner.

The only advantage bad scrum has over waterfall is that you realise your project is doomed a lot quicker.

[Steve67]

I wonder, at the end of this consultancy investigation, the outcome for Steven Hollis to ponder is do we need to sack Randy?

[pauliewalnuts]

I don't know much about lean, but - talking of Toyota originated systems - we have what we call "an evolving agile environment" in our place.

So, we talk loads about agile and scrum, and some of it, we do - stand ups, backlog planning, sprints - but so much of it is totally impractical in our place that it becomes really unrecognisable as scrum. It's just a pick and mix of stuff we can and can't do.

I had to go on a certified scrum master training course before christmas (all management have to - despite us never having to function as scrum masters).

Within the first hour, the trainer started telling us how, if we didn't have our product owner embedded with the team full time, it just wasn't ever going to work as it "isn't scrum". I asked her what the fuck we're meant to do if that can't ever happen within our structure (at our place, it can't) and the answer was to just keep on asking people until it did happen. Marvellous.

I'm pretty sure that at our place the efficiency savings which we make through our bastardised version of scrum are all spunked away in the time we waste talking about scrum / debating whether we're ever going to be agile / evangelising scrum to others in the company.

The easiest way for consultants to improve things at our place would be to come in with AK-47s and a helpful member of staff pointing out the colleagues we could do without.

Oh God, that sounds depressingly familiar.

I've worked on 3 agile projects, one worked very well, one was a bit half-assed but achieved something, and one was a total disaster. It really is all about the product owner.

The only advantage bad scrum has over waterfall is that you realise your project is doomed a lot quicker.

I think the theory is all fine. The problems start when you begin to try to put it into action.

Today I tried to get a product owner (a game producer) at our place to agree to come to a half-day backlog planning session this week. "I'm not spending 4 hours in a room listening to dev shit".

*sigh*

And what makes it worse is that I kind of see his point. I don't want to be there either. In fact, I won't, because I don't need to be, but getting people to buy in to the amount of time you lose to following 'good practice' is a huge problem for us.

Sprint planning, sprint reviews, backlog planning, it all saps a lot of time.

[kippaxvilla2]

I dread to think about these Villa Consultants adopting lean methodology to this job.  First thing is to identify and eliminate waste and-or duplicated processes.  So that's the goalkeeper and entire defence gone then.

[DaveD]

I think the theory is all fine. The problems start when you begin to try to put it into action.

Today I tried to get a product owner (a game producer) at our place to agree to come to a half-day backlog planning session this week. "I'm not spending 4 hours in a room listening to dev shit".

*sigh*

And what makes it worse is that I kind of see his point. I don't want to be there either. In fact, I won't, because I don't need to be, but getting people to buy in to the amount of time you lose to following 'good practice' is a huge problem for us.

Sprint planning, sprint reviews, backlog planning, it all saps a lot of time.

See that kind of behaviour makes me bristle. As a developer turned PM, I know all too well that without the 'Dev shit' he doesn't have a product to produce. Either write your ideas down clearly or sit with the team, or you will not get what you want, and it costs much more to fix it later than do it right first time. It's bad enough in banking where IT is seen as a necessary evil (on a good day), but surprised that attitude has crept into the gaming industry, being that much closer to the coal face.

[DaveD]

PS Apologies for talking shop on the Randy thread. I'm done now... </rant>

[Boz]

I work as a freelancer and have been since 1988, currently at a public service organisation with its own IT staff. Government have engaged with a consultancy to introduce these methodologies with all the buzz words like agile, waterfall, scrums etc. and I wonder how we managed to deliver projects before these methodologies came along? They generate lots of meetings, much prevarication, not a lot of delivery efficiency but confusion for the business people because they are not fully engaged and don't understand the terminology. A project I'm currently on has part of the work being done by the internal IT people and the other part by a small software house whose delivery of products embarrasses the internal deliverable timescales.
The consultants who sold the methodology to government departments has no doubt made a lot of money, but value for money, doubtful. With no bottom line to meet, the public sector is just not comparable  to the private sector on efficiency.
All IMO of course.

[maigrait]

Decent article, sums everything up nicely but nothing we haven't heard before... Apologies if posted elsewhere.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/in-bed-with-maradona/2016/feb/25/aston-villa-relegation-premier-league-championship

[mrfuse]

Decent article, sums everything up nicely but nothing we haven't heard before... Apologies if posted elsewhere.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/in-bed-with-maradona/2016/feb/25/aston-villa-relegation-premier-league-championship

Thanks for the link, it was a very well written article which pretty much sums everything up.

[ACVilla]

Decent article, sums everything up nicely but nothing we haven't heard before... Apologies if posted elsewhere.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/in-bed-with-maradona/2016/feb/25/aston-villa-relegation-premier-league-championship

That's grand that is. Ta.