I really loved the video

I love this part! The speaker mentions a "pump and dump" scheme in relation to how large funding groups manipulate media to influence stock prices. This involves buying a lot of media to publish overly positive news about a company, in this case Tesla, to artificially inflate the stock price. Then, once the price has risen, they sell their shares at a profit, which is what the speaker describes happened. Regarding the 10-year horizon, he discusses that the stock price in the short term (less than 10 years) is more affected by paid media than by company performance. However, over a longer term, like a 10-year or more horizon, the stock price is more reflective of the actual company performance. He suggests that CEOs need the permission to endure bad press for at least a decade to be bold and implement significant changes within a company, as short-term negative publicity can lead to short-term adverse effects on stock prices and potentially a CEO's tenancy. The speaker also provides an example with Herbert Diess from Volkswagen who faced negative press and was eventually fired. He emphasizes the importance of being financially independent or having investors who can endure bad press for about ten years to pursue ambitious goals without the pressure of immediate stock price fluctuations.

The speaker had cringe-worthy moments, attempting to be funny while talking down to Scrum Masters. He also exhibited arrogant behavior in general. Additionally, he discussed team topologies with disdain, portraying it as flawed approach with holes, while implying that he, as the speaker, knew better. I can see he is a capable professional, but this talk don't show him in a very good light

This video is one of the greatest tools on the internet. Joe Justice is doing humanity an incredible service.

Mind blowing. The last 5 minutes sums it up (as it should). I am very pleased I did some research in 2019. The rabbit hole is deep.

Some good insights into the scope and structuring of teams.

this is a brilliant talk from Paul!

Awesome closing remarks and Q&A about media, stock manipulation and CEO commitment. Oh and 💖 " there should be more agile coaches making companies, 💖 than coaching someone else's company." One of your best ever sessions. Thank you for your continuous inspiration Joe.

♥♥♥Every "module" of 5 people have their own independent budget and act as their own business unit. "Project Management works without any project managers" ™ ♥♥♥ It's very hard to fire existing middle management in an organization, particularly with labour laws, that vary by country. Much easier to join a startup and grow in size without ever having management in the first place. LOVE this strategy of giving module teams their own budget. kzbin.info/www/bejne/qqirZYBrnq6ca9Esi=xGVSflN6umgWYHTr&t=837

“Science doesn’t like perpetual novelty” 19:10 “I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.” Richard Feynman I can’t think of a single legitimate scientist who doesn’t thrive on novelty, or even believes that if a Theory of Everything were discovered, it would be the end of uncertainty. Nor as is commonly asserted - is science in the business of proving things. Both accusations are not just false, but the opposite of the truth.

He bashes Lean Startup, but the last techniques he talks about are completely aligned with it...

This is a talk on www.orgtopologies.com/

Dobry i jakościowy wykład!

Brilliant! These visualisation examples were great

meeehhh.... boring arrogant ... the usual crap.....

For transparency Scrum is described a lightweight "framework" that helps people, teams and organizations generate value through adaptive solutions for complex problems. I would perhaps also say "purposely incomplete" With that said, I understand Dave's distinction.

My favorite law is the law of two feet. I've learned it from Henrick. ❤ Thanks

If we’re pattern matching in our thinking, which we are as we run off heuristics and past experiences, how is that not the same as having mental models? For that matter, how are computers different than us in that they too are pattern matchers? As for mindset, I’ve always seen the word as synonymous with perspective not as a requisite mood, demeanor, attitude toward some effort. For whatever reason I hate the word “lens” when talking about perspective, changing perspective, changing scope of perspective. But if you use ‘mindset’ merely as perspective, you won’t have these issues with it while you’re still completely free to work around agency, assemblage, affordances. As for consciousness and decisions, they only happen in our brains. Languages, experiences, culture can all influence such as can current bodily dynamics and functions but the decisions only happen in the brain. No action takes place without direction from the brain. His bit here is too much an overstep while his view to epigenetics is too much a neo-Lamarkism. The hypothesis that RNA could make portions of DNA more or less accessible has coherence, it makes sense. The idea that culture is inherited and attributes are inherited based on such is garbage. As Neil deGrasse Tyson tells us, sometimes you need to step back from the leading edge of science as “it isn’t there yet” while too often published papers are too fantastical to accept while we don’t have the replicate work as motive is to publish novel and fantastical. See also Veritasium on these.

How is riding a horse Complex while training a dog isn’t?

Super interesting. As someone who works in government, this would be a god send!

Loved Ceren’s voice and narration as much as the great drawing.

Superb, thanks Joe🎉

16:09 Because the human brain wants completion + progression at all costs

I hate your numbering! 😤

'promo sm'

Solid talk. Nick knows his stuff.

Do anyone know what app was used by Craig Larman to visualize his speech?

He speaks like Bhagwan Sri Rajneesh. It seems though he hasn't that many followers at the moment.

Fantastic talk!

It's refreshing to listen to Dave Snowden play with others. I've never seen Craig Larman speak before this video - WOW. Still skeptical of Steve Denning. Jutta Eckstein's presence is refreshing!

brilliant talk

13:15 … this is why terms like mindset and mental models are outdated … brilliant!

А де відбувається цей мітап? І як часто?

Great talk. Scrum is a process though: it defines roles, and is pretty specific about its activities (processes), which it calls (erroneously) "event". E.g., a sprint is "fixed length", "starts immediately after the conclusion of the previous Sprint", and the guide specifies "During the Sprint...". There are things left to the team, but these are well enough to constitute a process definition. He also says that one must address more than behavior. He is right. But behavior is where it must start. If you change the behavior of the leaders, they will create the org changes that he talks about. If you don't change their behavior, they won't.

brilliant talk, Henrik is the best!

I watched a lot of Dave Snowden on KZbin lately. It's interesting to get some other viewpoints here in this discussion.

👏 𝔭𝔯𝔬𝔪𝔬𝔰𝔪

Very interesting presentation. In my point of view SAFe is a good starting point for some organizations to start working towards being agile, which have managers that would like to have a recipe in order to “reduce risks”.

That opening line though 🤣 "data after lunch....you must be really keen"

I find very interesting and useful many of the ideas and theories shared in large part of the video after the initial few minutes. Personally, I find the first 2 minutes incongruent with my own experience of software development and Agile software development. > you can’t rely on your organisation being made up by highly gifted people In software development for sure, we always had and have many gifted people. Most of us, the majority. The problem has often been the environment around software developers that makes it harder to use their gift to achieve the goals they are asked to achieve. To the point that most of the efforts to make allegedly less competent people (in reality just less experienced people that can be paid less, and then left alone or without good examples to follow) productive with more processes, policies and "controllers" ended up in very expensive failures. Again and again and again. There is a track record of this that predates good Agile, and that is why Agile was born, for a reaction to those problems. The idea of going back there again, with not empirical evidence that this time it will work is not confincing to me, > it is not about individuals is about process > ... > …they take ordinary people and make them extraordinary by good processes and good training Before Agile turned the tide on the high percentage of IT project failures, there were a lot of focus on processes and a lot of ex-cathedra talking from the SEI institute and Software Engineering academics with little experience in commercial/professional software development and no empirical experiments to prove their recipes. Toyota before and later Agile have discovered that people do play a central role. Empirical processes that are needed in presence of unknowns, changing circumstances and novel situations require people to play a central role. Eiji Toyoda highlights: <<Since people make things, work must begin with developing people.>> Agile Manifesto: Individuals and interactions over processes and tools As this does not means that processes are useless, in knowledge and intellectual work they are just not the most important aspects. In the Agiel community we saw that learning is a social activity and professional learning is best achivede by collaborating with good professionals (our gifted software developers) allowed to do the right thing. << Some things can’t be told. You live them or you don’t. But they can’t be told. >> ------------------------- To summarise, I find those two initial minutes dissonant. ------------------------- On the topic of rewinding Agile, I see a growing awareness of the dysfunction of the latest Agile Industrial Complex (2010 .. now) and a rethink around bringing back good Agile (the one that in 2000...2008 created a streak of success that turned the tide and brought Agile from a fringe movement into a mainstream). Vocal members in the Agile Community like Chris Matts and Daniel Mezick but also others like Yves Hannoun are contributing to this movement of ideas. So maybe the rewilding of Agile will be the result of another bottom-up movement as it was the initial Agile movement and good Agile, and this may happen if it will reach a tipping point. Or maybe something completely new will take over. But I guess that just like the open-source movement, Agile may be here to stay. We will see.

Thank you Joe for the content. Please which areas in agile manufacturing, from your experience are lacking extensive research/immature?

Bardzo ciekawe podejście, dobrze, że to wystąpienie się pojawiło w sieci. Ja od siebie dodam jeszcze to, że istotą jest optymalizacja (i automatyzacja) procesów. Jako SM pracowałem kiedyś z zespołem SDK, który robił delivery do klienta w około 3-tygodniowych cyklach. W ciągu 2-3 kwartałów udało się zejść do niecałych 24h. Oczywiście nie tylko dzięki mnie, bo również była świetna PO, sam zespół bardzo dobrze kolaborował oraz mieliśmy w organizacji postawione na to OKRy i zdrowe wsparcie LM. Mimo wszystko udało mi się wprowadzić w zespół Event Strorming, co było strzałem w dziesiątkę. Dzięki temu zobaczyliśmy co faktycznie robimy i co jeszcze jest do zrobienia oraz wszyscy złapali wspólny język i zaczęli jechać na tym samym wózku. Efektem był zoptymalizowany backlog, który każdy rozumiał - wartość biznesowa była z tego ogromna. W dalszych etapach pozwoliło to nam zrozumieć zależności z innymi zespołami (których była masa, bo każdy commitował, a na końcu team musiał to poskładać w paczkę do klienta) oraz tak wyszkolić cały unit, żeby to wszystko miało ręce i nogi. Cały Scrum Team dołożył się do tego sukcesu! I teraz czysta matematyka - mieć zespół, który coś robi 3 tygodnie (15 dni roboczych) vs taki, który coś robi 24h (1 dzień roboczy). Oszczędność mamy na poziomie 14 dni roboczych. Dzięki dobrej kolaboracji teamu, PO i SMa, LMa oraz unitu udaje się oszczędzić firmie kilka FTE przez okres 14 dni roboczych! Wystarczy to teraz przeliczyć na stawki godzinowe i mamy odpowiedź na pytanie "dlaczego warto dobrze płacić dobrym ludziom" (tudzież na pytanie z 11:14 "A dlaczego Scrum Masterzy tak dużo zarabiają?").

podoba mi się koncept przeliczenia wartości scrum mastera na inne benefity. Można by zrobić eksperyment i odpalić 3 zespoły, jeden ze scrum masterem, drugi z budżetem szkoleniowym, trzeci z imprezami co tydzień. po pół roku porównać skuteczność.

Jealousy is the #1 killer of innovation in any room full of creative consultants

white males explaining the world using economics. #checkurprivileges

Thank you. I've learned a lot from this video.

Amazing presentation, thanks Stephanie. Very insightful 😊

Wasn’t the pull demo just waterfall ;D