Comments for Derek W. Wade

Comment on Birthright by Ebenezer Tolman

Ebenezer Tolman — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 01:44:00 +0000

In studying systems, I came to the conclusion that the larger system typically determines the course of its constituent sub-systems. Planet Earth circles the sun at a distance of 93 million miles, so Europe, Asia, and the Pacific Ocean also travel around the sun at the same distance. If I decide to run a marathon, my feet run 26.2 miles. If I eat a cheeseburger, my stomach has to absorb that. If I smoke cigarettes, my lungs and blood stream deal with tar and nicotine. When Japan went to war with the U.S., its citizens, including un-comprehending babies, eventually lived, and died, under a rain of bombs from B-29 Superfortresses. And so on.

With that in mind, I decided that my emotions should not determine my course, but rather I should determine the course of my emotions. I realized that I could choose my internal state just as I choose which pair of shoes to put on in the morning. I may not control the weather, the politicians, or the bankers (all external milieux), but I can decide whether I want to be happy or not. I realized that I could choose to be a happy and peaceful person, irrespective of the external situation. This was my birthright, just as much as a pair of legs and a nose. I simply can choose to be peaceful and happy. It is my birthright.

Comment on Balancing Advocacy With Inquiry at Agile Coach Camp by Olaf Lewitz

Olaf Lewitz — Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:48:56 +0000

Derek,
Thanks for clarifying:-)
And again, for the awesome session!
So good to have met you in person, finally…
Take care
Olaf

Comment on Birthright by Brittney Mitchell

Brittney Mitchell — Tue, 30 Aug 2011 16:05:52 +0000

To pierce inside the glittered box
You find a space where empty stalks
Never vacant, always enhanced
Meant to keep the short mind entranced
The envelope was always sealed
To keep intent scantly revealed
The beautified must always spin
Dare to stand still and glow within

Comment on The UX and the SM Should Be Friends by Carol Smith

Carol Smith — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 03:57:37 +0000

And so it begins my friend – I look forward to our discourse!

Carol

Comment on Coherence and Dispersion in Teams by CAS Simulation as a Java Applet | Scrum WithStyle

CAS Simulation as a Java Applet | Scrum WithStyle — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 04:47:12 +0000

[...] Derek Wade notes in his blog post on this, we shouldn’t take this exercises to mean that you can simply dish out rules and expect [...]

Comment on If You Had Been Me at ScrumGathering 2010 by Orlando Scrum Gathering 2010 Diary | Conscires

Orlando Scrum Gathering 2010 Diary | Conscires — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 00:22:34 +0000

[...] http://derekwwade.net/blog/2010/03/10/if-you-had-been-me-at-scrumgathering-2010/ [...]

Comment on Coherence and Dispersion in Teams by Derek

Derek — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:12:52 +0000

Hi Tobias!

At SGUS, a friend apologized to me for so often “correcting the words I use when I say something,” to which I replied that I actually appreciate it when he does that. I think with such a high degree of association that when I try to express a concept in my head, it almost always comes out imprecise, and thus requires interaction with another person in order to get the concept refined to its essence.

So, thank you, Tobias, for appropriately refining my post. :)

Yes, implosion is EXACTLY what is happening here! And I think it looked good to me initially because I tend to be strongly biased against fragmentation. But it makes sense that EITHER focus (on defending against others, or protecting others) is a focus on OTHERS, and not on the self, and thus leads to an unbalanced system.

Comment on If You Had Been Me at ScrumGathering 2010 by Andy Brandt

Andy Brandt — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:09:23 +0000

Great summary! I miss being there less now after reading your post. BTW – never heard of Twitter Fountain, but now I know it is a great idea to put one somewhere during an event.

Comment on Coherence and Dispersion in Teams by Tobias Mayer

Tobias Mayer — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:08:37 +0000

I don’t agree that the second part of this exercise is towards cohesion. It /appears/ to be that way but what is actually happening is an implosion, and a situation is created where no one can actually move anymore. It is stifling. When I observe this it reminds me of teams where the ScrumMaster is so zealous about “protecting the team” that s/he doesn’t allow the the team any space to grow. Teams that spend too much time protecting each other tend to isolate those outside the team. We have all seen this: “we do Scrum now so we don’t write documents”, or “we do Scrum now so you (manager) can’t tell us what to do”. Such behaviour is exclusive and doesn’t go towards building a collaborative environment.

The first part of this exercise is about running and hiding. Not taking any responsibility. The second part of this exercise is about taking too much responsibility — for /other people/. Neither demonstrates the value of taking responsibility for ones own actions and trusting others to do the same.

Cool that you all captured this on video though :-)

Comment on Drugging the Mother-in-Law by Fred

Fred — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:08:36 +0000

You are right, the key of success is to keep Scrum simple. If you try to modify it by -mainly- adding useless things just because it exist in your organisation, you will fail.