Alternatives to designating the work units on boards as "tasks"

It strikes me that defining work as “tasks” may, in some ways be an impediment. Thinking about XP and the idea that each work card should have an associated test that marks it as being done…I wondered if the markers are the boards could be thought of as representing “tests”…a set of tests the project has to pass before it is considered “done”. You would still estimate time for them, etc.
One consequence that would fall out would be that in some cases you could automate the task hitting the done stage…if it passed its tests it would be done, and move on to the next test, which would automatically generate a pull signal on the board. It would also facilitate restructuring part of the things that needed to be done (that is, changing to use different tests), as long as the down stream tests defined for the project still apply it would still be the “same” project.

Since you mention XP, the most sensible way to approach this is with TDD as an engineering practice.

In TameFlow the “columns” do not represent “stages” in a process that moves “tasks”.

The columns represent moments of “collaboration” between “roles” who discover/uncover/create “knowledge” around an “idea” that moves along from “conception” to “delivery.”

Seeing the board items as task is useful when you get started or when you are doing value stream mapping or when migrating from a conventional Kanban Board - but it is just the start.

To boost Psychological Flow (at the team level) we want as much co-creation to happen as possible, all the time. At the extreme (Yes! XP heritage…) you’d be mobprogramming, though that is not always possible in “corporate settings,” and especially when the work is not about programming.

Dunno if this helps…

Yes, helps a lot. I particularly like the idea of progressive sophistication in how people think about the kanban board. That part is what I was looking for and I’m going to think more about it.

I’m also happy that my old ideas about XP seem to be becoming more and more useful to me as I get further into this.

Regarding TameFlow & XP, did you see this?..

I think so, but I’ll check again. My biggest questions now are more about other issues. The dynamics of helping an organization decide to “improve” itself… or helping them follow thru on that kind of decision. It’s a question I’ll have for the class… what kinds of motivations do organizations show up with ?

Never think “organization”… think “individuals” and their personal “needs” that drive them. Whom are you talking to? What do they want? Help them get what they want by “improving the organization”… We always go back to the secret sauce of Enlightened Self-Interest!