https://www.hbhau.net/2007/06/18/retrospective-deltas/ <![CDATA[Comments on: Retrospective Deltas]]> Brett Henderson WordPress 2007-06-18T13:19:43Z https://www.hbhau.net/2007/06/18/retrospective-deltas/comment-page-1/#comment-31 2007-06-18T13:19:43Z <![CDATA[Hamstaa! » Blame has no place in retrospectives on Retrospective Deltas]]> http://www.hbhau.net/2007/06/08/blame-has-no-place-in-retrospectives/ […] Management Reading List Retrospective Deltas […]

]]>
https://www.hbhau.net/2007/06/18/retrospective-deltas/comment-page-1/#comment-32 2007-06-18T20:02:17Z <![CDATA[Doug South on Retrospective Deltas]]> http://www.trontos.com/dsouth/blog/ Is the list really getting bigger? I think we do a fair job of managing the size of the list. If we feel a delta from last week is still important/relevant, it gets added to this week’s deltas. If it isn’t important (no one thinks it delivers enough value) it gets dropped.

We review the deltas while we are prioritizing them and sometimes (from an engineering point of view) we identify them as something to be added to the slack page. Now that is something that is growing faster than we are removing items from. But since it isn’t seen as important as the deltas, I’m not too concerned with its size (which may be the size you are commenting on here?).

Where I am concerned is what I perceive to be a lack of commitment from the team on owning deltas and following through on doing something positive about the deltas. What the author of the article identifies as accountability. As a team, we still have lots of room to learn and grow in this respect.

This also highlights to me an issue with retrospectives. We seem to struggle a bit with remembering what happened in the last week for the retrospectives. We’ve talked about moving to a two week iteration which implies bi-weekly retrospectives. I see a potential problem here that we will need to address.

]]>