In a broader sense, though, why am I supporting following the guidance? Because without experience, changing the recipe has a much higher risk of creating a bad dish. That’s all.

Yes, most Scrum documents talk about 30-day sprints. It’s in Ken Schwaber’s books, it’s on his web site, etc.

http://www.controlchaos.com/old-site/rules.htm

So you see, you’ve just proved my point…

Many people think it’s better not to do 4-weeks sprints but 2-week sprints. Why should we start with the rules of the book, when we know that doing something else is better in our situation?

A team of one? That isn’t a team and as such has no need for a team management model like Scrum, XP, Chrystal, or anything else IMO. I also find myself working on individual projects and without team mates quite often. In those times, I do not use any formal process other than my own to-do list.

I would also argue that even in this situation, the focus can and should remain on value delivery. I can be Lean all by myself.

A team of one? That isn’t a team and as such has no need for a team management model like Scrum, XP, Chrystal, or anything else IMO. I also find myself working on individual projects and without team mates quite often. In those times, I do not use any formal process other than my own to-do list.

Now ask this, “How can I truly excel in a vacuum?”

I don’t agree. This is often just not possible.

How am I supposed to apply the standard 4-week iterations of Scrum when all of my projects only last for 3 weeks on average?

How am I supposed to apply the 5-9 team members rule when I have a team of just one person?

I have blogged about this in “Copy-Paste Reasoning (or Adopt, Skip Adopt)”
http://www.noop.nl/2008/06/copy-paste-reasoning.html