What are your opinions on Dual-Track Scrum? I've only recently been 'exposed' to it and I'm struggling to find any real case studies on it.
It seems to me, from what I understand, that it is a way of justifying team's to not be fully cross-functional. It also seems that it may be a decent way of temporarily managing development while an organisation tries to work towards full cross-functionality, but is not quite there yet. (Emphasis on temporary)
Anyway, I might be off on that, and if someone could direct me to case studies or anything where there's actual data to support it, that would be great!
No edit, but am I also correct in saying it's sneakily adding 'phases' or 'stages' back to development?
That seems like a fair assessment. A "special" sprint antipattern may well emerge along with the role silos to support it.
In Scrum, if a hypothesis needs to be validated, just use a Sprint to frame and deliver the corresponding MVP.
On the other hand, if scope needs to be better understood before work can be planned into a Sprint, improve Product Backlog refinement such as by means of investigative spikes.
Hi Ian, on the face of it may feel like it's running against the traditional scrum/agile grain. Your suggestion certainly fits with everything we know and love about scrum, but it does get messy in practice. Confused sprint goals and interruptions to producing shippable increments are a couple of the side-effects.
I've been researching to try and find a better way of incorporating user research into the cycle. A lot of Jeff Patton's (he came up with the idea) assertions make a lot of sense. Keep an open mind, give it a read.
Great link, Steven! Thanks for sharing!