Discussion: "Decide as Late as Possible"

| by Deborah Hartmann Preuss Follow 0 Followers on May 18, 2006. Estimated reading time: 1 minute |

A note to our readers: You asked so we have developed a set of features that allow you to reduce the noise: you can get email and web notifications for topics you are interested in. Learn more about our new features.

Chapter 3 of Lean Software Development is titled "Decide as late as possible".  It's an important tenet for self-managing teams, encouraging them to avoid detailed discussions of items not currently under development or nearby on the planning horizon.  This practice keeps teams from dissipating their energy on discussions that will only be rehashed again later.  It keeps them focused on their current committments and facilitates what psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi calls "flow" - a state where work is focused and uninterrupted.
Flow is a mental state of operation in which the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing, characterized by a feeling of energized focus, full involvement, and success in the process of the activity. --Wikipedia
But "decide at the last possible moment" does not suggest blindly plowing ahead without thought for upcoming features.  Some trainers modify this to "decide as late as responsibly possible", for clarity. It's a practice that requires a careful balancing act, which one learns over time.

This goes against the grain for many new Agille managers or team leads, who are used to mitigating risk through careful up-front planning.  Can this possibly be right?  A group of ScrumMasters recently discussed the topic, drawing on many collective years of experience.

Rate this Article

Adoption Stage

Hello stranger!

You need to Register an InfoQ account or or login to post comments. But there's so much more behind being registered.

Get the most out of the InfoQ experience.

Tell us what you think

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Email me replies to any of my messages in this thread

Second Link by Geoffrey Wiseman

Is that final link accurate? It's pointing to the 'lean software' book, whereas I expected it to point to a discussion.

This is a critical point for me. I can't count the hours I've personally seen go into considering and reconsidering possible avenues before getting to the clarity that implementation-level thought brings. It does require an environment and process that supports this kind of decision making, but it's a valuable ideal if you can get to it.

It depends by Johnny Blaze

It really depends on what you're deciding. As long as you have a general idea of what's being done it's fine to hammer out the specifics later. However, what's more important is to have a good team manager. If you have someone you can keep people focused with drifiting off topic or debate problems that haven't even arisen yet then you're in good hands.

I believe that it's always important to keep potential problems in the back of your mind at all times as you want to be able to point them out before they become irreparable. At the same time, however, you don't want to get bogged down debating the minutia.

Re: Second Link by Deborah Hartmann

Apologies! My mistake :-)
I'll go fix that, thanks for pointing it out!

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Email me replies to any of my messages in this thread

Allowed html: a,b,br,blockquote,i,li,pre,u,ul,p

Email me replies to any of my messages in this thread

3 Discuss

Login to InfoQ to interact with what matters most to you.

Recover your password...


Follow your favorite topics and editors

Quick overview of most important highlights in the industry and on the site.


More signal, less noise

Build your own feed by choosing topics you want to read about and editors you want to hear from.


Stay up-to-date

Set up your notifications and don't miss out on content that matters to you