I would be interested to see how this philosophy works in the long run. The beginning of the article gives the impression that any team / manager can discard these processes, but later it seems more apparent that this only works because the particular team is already operating at high efficiency and likely don’t have many major disagreements in product direction or priorities. In my opinion the communication is really important. For selecting work to do, you need to know your individual priorities / perspective are grounded in the rest of the teams perspective. This helps you know that the work you’re doing is useful and will be appreciated which in turn makes you proud to work on it. Also, I think retrospective is a good place to address process changes in a structured way make sure each voice is heard as opposed to doing it ad-hoc and assuming it will work out. It’s hard to notice when changes occur and for what reason when you change variables more randomly. I would also say, maybe we need to better understand our tools. For example if standups are taking 30 minutes and info is not relevant to entire team, the answer isn’t to remove standup. It’s to go back to core purpose and make it meaningful information.

Written by

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store