That eliminates that rushed feeling we have the last two days each time.

I don't agree with everything in the post. It's not quite as simple as 26 x 2. And the comments about crunch vs. death march get a little too specific in terminology rather than focusing on why isn't agile as happy and flexible as I heard it would be. Why is there a crunch at all if the process is about a shifting big picture being broken down into a sustainable drive with visibility into what comes next?

"The question is what is sustainable. I am hearing stories that don’t sound like only the last 2 days of a sprint are a death march. Every day feels like a death march."

Does Agile Drive Death March Projects?

Snarky: It's not a deathmarch. We're simply redefining iterations as sixteen hours long.  Once a day.
Title: That eliminates that rushed feeling we have the last two days each time.

Like iteration one?

Having only a little experience with a formal agile process in practice, I'm finding some of the naming conventions rather odd.  For example, iteration zero.  I get the point of it and as a developer I like to have it but why do we call it iteration zero when it is not really an iteration at all? We're not doing user stories, acceptance testing and all the rest of what goes with a typical iteration. Why not give it's own name like we do for everything that gets done before iteration zero has - release planning.  And if we're not ok with it having a special name, shouldn't we be consistent with the whole iteration concept and call release planning iteration -1.

I suppose the PMO might not really appreciate that very much.



Title: Like iteration one?
Snarky: The business decided iteration zero is too big.  You're going to have to cut some features.