<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Make Your Process Workflow Explicit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://toolsforagile.com/blog/archives/178/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://toolsforagile.com/blog/archives/178</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:14:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: siddharta</title>
		<link>http://toolsforagile.com/blog/archives/178/comment-page-1#comment-103170</link>
		<dc:creator>siddharta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 10:43:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.silverstripesoftware.com/blog/archives/178#comment-103170</guid>
		<description>Hi David,

I&#039;m not advocating that managers impose a workflow, rather look at what you are already doing and make it visible. If you are doing build and test in a single step, then by all means keep it as a single stage in the workflow. The problem arises when you are doing a workflow in practice, but its implicit and not made visible.

Nice blog post btw. Like the use of cumulative flow graphs. They are very useful indeed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi David,</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not advocating that managers impose a workflow, rather look at what you are already doing and make it visible. If you are doing build and test in a single step, then by all means keep it as a single stage in the workflow. The problem arises when you are doing a workflow in practice, but its implicit and not made visible.</p>
<p>Nice blog post btw. Like the use of cumulative flow graphs. They are very useful indeed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Draper</title>
		<link>http://toolsforagile.com/blog/archives/178/comment-page-1#comment-103169</link>
		<dc:creator>David Draper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 10:23:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.silverstripesoftware.com/blog/archives/178#comment-103169</guid>
		<description>In the most part I agree. In fact I blogged a few weeks ago on visualising these workflow steps outside of the sprint. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.agiledesign.co.uk/scrum/managing-wip-with-scrum/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.

On the other hand we do need to take care to retain the workflow within the sprint as property of the team. I have invited teams to describe their workflow, even make it visible if it helps them. But they must own it and be free to change it over time.

I see a risk with the current enthusiasm for Kanban that managers are taking back workflow and Kanban as a means for directing the team.

Fortunately, so far I have seen no evidence of this, it&#039;s just a niggling concern.

Regards

Dave.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the most part I agree. In fact I blogged a few weeks ago on visualising these workflow steps outside of the sprint. <a href="http://www.agiledesign.co.uk/scrum/managing-wip-with-scrum/" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</p>
<p>On the other hand we do need to take care to retain the workflow within the sprint as property of the team. I have invited teams to describe their workflow, even make it visible if it helps them. But they must own it and be free to change it over time.</p>
<p>I see a risk with the current enthusiasm for Kanban that managers are taking back workflow and Kanban as a means for directing the team.</p>
<p>Fortunately, so far I have seen no evidence of this, it&#8217;s just a niggling concern.</p>
<p>Regards</p>
<p>Dave.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
