Timeline for How do big development teams learn from their mistakes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 10, 2020 at 9:27 | comment | added | Robin Bennett | @jim, I can't point to any resources as it's not my area, but that's how the QA team investigated major process issues at an old job of mine. I think it warrants writing down as an answer of it's own. | |
| Sep 10, 2020 at 9:20 | comment | added | Jim | @RobinBennett: Interesting! How would that be applied as a "formal" process? | |
| Sep 10, 2020 at 9:00 | comment | added | Robin Bennett | @jim, you could try the 5-why's (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys) to get the root cause of the problem. | |
| Sep 10, 2020 at 8:05 | comment | added | berry120 | @Jim Typically a retrospective would do just that, but if ways of working and communication could be the root cause of those technical issues, then it could still be appropriate (these things aren't set in stone.) They're both standard terminology, and often used interchangeably - personally I tend to think of a retrospective more as a regular occurrence, and a post-mortem as more of a one-off around a bunch of issues, but YMMV when searching around. | |
| Sep 10, 2020 at 8:01 | comment | added | Jim |
you're looking to have a post-mortem is that a standard methodology I can read about?
|
|
| Sep 10, 2020 at 8:01 | comment | added | Jim |
extended sprint retrospective is in order I was under the impression that these retrospectives are meant to deal solely with communication and collaboration issues
|
|
| Sep 10, 2020 at 7:58 | history | answered | berry120 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |