© 2024 TREEHOUSE SOFTWARE LTDA. All rights reserved.
CNPJ: 46.671.142/0001–81
This document is the property of TREEHOUSE SOFTWARE LTDA. and describes the work system based on the CORE framework. Any reproduction or use of this material without the express authorization of the company is prohibited.
Introduction
The CORE Framework integrates the pillars of Clarity, Ownership, Resilience, and Evolution in a software development environment. This document outlines the main use cases, highlighting the involved actors, their interactions, working relationships, consequences, and risks, while emphasizing how CORE can enhance development environments through empathy among all parties involved.
Main Actors
- Product Owner (PO): Responsible for defining and prioritizing project requirements.
- Scrum Master (SM): Facilitates interactions among team members, promoting agile practices and the CORE culture.
- Developers: Responsible for the technical implementation of functionalities.
- Stakeholders: Any party interested in or affected by the project (clients, managers, etc.).
Scenario 1: Planning and Requirement Definition
Description
In this case, the PO, supported by the SM, leads a planning session where project requirements are discussed and prioritized.
Interactions
The PO presents the product vision and prioritized requirements, creating a safe space for expressing ideas and concerns.
The SM facilitates the discussion, ensuring that all team members have the opportunity to contribute and feel valued.
The Developers provide technical feedback on the feasibility of requirements, fostering a collaborative environment.
Working Relationships
Collaboration between the PO and the developers is crucial for aligning expectations and ensuring that requirements are clear and achievable, promoting empathy and mutual understanding.
The SM acts as a mediator, fostering a respectful and productive work environment where everyone feels heard.
Consequences
Positive outcomes include a clear definition of objectives and priorities, reducing ambiguity at the project’s outset and increasing team confidence.
Lack of clarity can lead to misunderstandings and rework, undermining team morale.
Risks
Frequent changes in priorities can destabilize planning, making it more challenging for all involved.
Lack of developer involvement in requirement definition may result in technically unfeasible solutions, jeopardizing final delivery.
Conclusion of the Scenario
In this scenario, CORE stands out by promoting a culture of empathy and collaboration. Interactions among the actors are not just about delivering results but about understanding each other’s needs and building a project together.
Scenario 2: Sprint Execution
Description
Developers execute sprints to implement the defined requirements, with daily meetings to monitor progress and resolve impediments.
Interactions
The Developers report task status during Daily Stand-ups, allowing everyone to share their victories and challenges.
The SM identifies and removes impediments, facilitating communication among team members and showing support for the difficulties faced.
The PO may be called to clarify requirements or provide feedback on what has been implemented, reinforcing the connection between expectations and the reality of development.
Working Relationships
Constant interaction between developers and the SM is vital to ensure that everyone is aware of daily goals and challenges, fostering a supportive environment.
Continuous feedback between the PO and developers helps adjust the project direction in real-time, promoting a clear and respectful understanding of everyone’s needs.
Consequences
Well-executed sprints result in value increments to the product, enhancing stakeholder satisfaction and building a strong sense of achievement within the team.
Lack of communication can lead to errors and misunderstandings about the functionalities being developed, generating frustration.
Risks
Unresolved impediments can lead to significant delays in delivery, creating tension and distrust.
Pressure for quick deliveries may compromise code quality, affecting team morale.
Conclusion of the Scenario
In this scenario, CORE emphasizes the importance of empathy and collaboration, where the team supports each other in an environment of growth and learning. This not only improves work quality but also strengthens bonds among team members.
Scenario 3: Review and Retrospective
Description
At the end of each sprint, the team conducts a review meeting to demonstrate what has been completed and a retrospective to discuss process improvements.
Interactions
The PO and Stakeholders participate in the review meeting, providing feedback on what has been delivered and expressing their perspectives on the final product.
During the retrospective, all actors discuss what worked well and what needs improvement, fostering a culture of evolution and continuous learning.
Working Relationships
The PO and Stakeholders interact with developers to validate deliveries and align expectations, creating space for open and honest dialogue.
The SM facilitates the retrospective, ensuring that all team members feel comfortable sharing their opinions and learnings, promoting a collective growth environment.
Consequences
Continuous improvement is promoted, with the team implementing actions to enhance the process with each sprint, strengthening trust and unity within the group.
The absence of an effective review process can lead to an accumulation of unaddressed feedback, resulting in products that do not meet expectations, causing frustration.
Risks
Resistance to change from the team may hinder the implementation of improvements, undermining the collaborative spirit of CORE.
Negative feedback from stakeholders without a clear action plan may demotivate developers, affecting team morale and productivity.
Conclusion of the Scenario
In this scenario, CORE highlights the importance of feedback and collective reflection. By building an environment where everyone feels comfortable expressing their opinions, the team can learn from its experiences and grow as a unit, continuously improving the development environment.
Comparison with Other Methodologies
Differences and Similarities
Scrum:
- Positive Points Absorbed: Sprint structures and regular meetings (Daily Stand-ups, Reviews, and Retrospectives).
- Aspects Left Aside: The rigidity in roles (PO and SM) is softened in CORE, promoting greater flexibility and collaboration among members.
Kanban:
- Positive Points Absorbed: Visualization of workflow and focus on continuous improvement.
- Aspects Left Aside: The lack of a defined time frame for delivery is replaced by the sprint structure, maintaining work cadence.
Lean:
- Positive Points Absorbed: Focus on waste elimination and process optimization.
- Aspects Left Aside: Some practices of extensive documentation have been simplified to maintain agility.
Extreme Programming (XP):
- Positive Points Absorbed: Collaborative practices and test-driven development.
- Aspects Left Aside: The extreme emphasis on pair programming is moderated, allowing flexibility in practice choices.
Waterfall:
- Positive Points Absorbed: The importance of initial planning and documentation.
- Aspects Left Aside: The rigidity of sequential phases is abandoned in favor of a more agile iterative cycle.
General Conclusion
The CORE Framework emerges as an innovative approach in the field of software development, synthesizing the best practices from various established methodologies while promoting a culture of empathy, collaboration, and continuous evolution. In a world where agility and adaptability are essential for success, CORE stands out by integrating the pillars of Clarity, Ownership, Resilience, and Evolution, creating a conducive environment for development teams to thrive.
The proposal of CORE is clear: it is not just about delivering software, but about cultivating a space where all team members feel valued and engaged. By emphasizing the importance of human interactions, CORE promotes open dialogue among the different actors in the process, allowing expectations to be aligned from the outset and feedback to be incorporated continuously. This approach not only strengthens bonds among team members but also results in higher quality and more relevant products for stakeholders.
In the early stages of implementation, CORE already demonstrates its value by facilitating clarity in requirements and communication, as well as encouraging ownership of tasks among developers. The framework provides a flexible structure that can be adapted to the specific needs of different teams and projects, increasing its applicability in various contexts. As more organizations adopt agile practices, the demand for a framework that offers a more holistic and people-centered experience becomes increasingly evident.
Over time, as CORE continues to be studied and refined, it has the potential to become a robust substitute for existing methodologies. Practical experience and field validation are essential to strengthen its credibility. As teams implement CORE, collecting data and testimonials, it will be possible to further refine its practices and expand its acceptance in the market.
CORE is not limited to being a new methodology; it represents an evolution in thinking about how software should be developed. The emphasis on resilience and adaptability not only prepares teams to face current challenges but also positions them to adapt to future market needs. This framework invites everyone to rethink their traditional approaches and explore how collaboration and empathy can be driving forces in development environments.
In summary, the CORE Framework is on a promising trajectory, presenting itself as a viable and attractive alternative for organizations seeking not only to deliver products but also to create a positive and productive work environment. The growing acceptance of agile and people-centered approaches suggests that CORE is destined to become a reference in the industry, guiding software development into a new era of innovation and collaboration.
The CORE Framework is still in its early stages of study and development. While the concepts and ideas behind it are promising, we know there is a long road ahead before it can be widely recognized and included in Software Engineering textbooks. What we have so far is a solid foundation for something we believe has great potential.
If you’re an enthusiast of new methodologies, a researcher, or a professional looking to explore new ways of teamwork and software development, I would be thrilled to have your participation. Anyone interested in collaborating or providing feedback on the CORE Framework is more than welcome to reach out. Let’s explore, learn, and build something that could transform the way we develop software. Feel free to reach out to me at jgmluiz@icloud.com, and let’s embark on this journey together!
Top comments (0)