Comments on: Perpetual multivote for pull scheduling

By: Fair Process and Agile – going further than the Scrum Team | Yeret on Agile/Kanban

Wed, 23 Feb 2011 06:54:18 +0000

[...] Backlog Prioritization among a Product Management team (btw this is related to Perpetual Multi-Voting but don’t forget to add in a [...]

By: Kanban – FAQ « Managing Software Development

Kanban – FAQ « Managing Software Development — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 04:03:59 +0000

[...] to make a decision. I found an interesting link where he talks about the prioritization of MMFs. Perpetual Multivote What kind of projects are best suited for Kanban? With my current knowledge, i feel that the [...]

By: » Kanban Board for Lean Software Development - Greg Starling's Agile Development, Gen Y and Social Tech Resource

Sun, 21 Mar 2010 18:28:04 +0000

[...] backlog can be changed at any time by the stakeholders (Corey Ladas has a great article on usingperpetual multi-vote to schedule this [...]

By: Multi-Voting « Steffen Prohaska

Multi-Voting « Steffen Prohaska — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 15:10:09 +0000

[...] Perpetual multivote for pull scheduling [1] [...]

By: Personal Kanban: Tangible Tasks Produce Prioritization | Personal Kanban

Personal Kanban: Tangible Tasks Produce Prioritization | Personal Kanban — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:02:08 +0000

[...] and Eric Willeke asynchronously put their heads together and came up with Perpetual Multivote. This process recognizes that good decision making has both temporal and social components. As [...]

By: Corey Ladas

Corey Ladas — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:38:40 +0000

There are value, cost, and investment factors for every feature. Different participants have insight into each of these. Voting and auction schemes might allow the participants to contribute their particular expertise at a lower cost than a more analytical or negotiated approach. For example, a design improvement might not look like a “feature” to the customer, but it reduces the cost of new features in the future. The sales guy won’t see that, but the architect will. So sometimes the architect should get his way, and we want a way to let him get his way occasionally for least fuss and least cost.

By: Chad Albrecht

Chad Albrecht — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 19:02:27 +0000

To speak to Eric’s point a bit, I think we should always evaluate features in terms of their dollar value. If we are to use ToC and Throughput Accounting to evaluate productivity then we must always think about our activities in terms of ‘The Goal’ which is to make money. I’ve documented this in a bit more detail here:

http://blog.chadalbrecht.com/p.....tures.aspx

On you concept of multi-voting, I would be interested in exploring the evaluation criteria that is used by each voter.

Thoughts?

By: Multi vote Kaizen board « Lean and Kanban

Multi vote Kaizen board « Lean and Kanban — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:54:39 +0000

[...] multivoting the team can vote on which item is the next highest priority to be pulled once a slot becomes [...]

By: Greg Starling's Agile Software Development Resource » Kanban Board for Lean Software Development

Sat, 25 Oct 2008 09:59:30 +0000

[...] backlog can be changed at any time by the stakeholders (Corey Ladas has a great article on using perpetual multi-vote to schedule this [...]

By: Corey Ladas

Corey Ladas — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:59:55 +0000

Whoops! Looks like the spam filter might have whacked some legitimate comments. Profuse apologies if I lost your comment.

Corey