<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Future of Two-in-a-Box</title>
	<link>http://orbitchange.com/blog/2006/11/18/two-in-a-box/</link>
	<description>Sharad Sharma examines the transformation challenges facing the software industry</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 05:46:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Mukul Kumar</title>
		<link>http://orbitchange.com/blog/2006/11/18/two-in-a-box/#comment-12</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 19 Nov 2006 16:19:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://orbitchange.com/blog/2006/11/18/two-in-a-box/#comment-12</guid>
					<description>Hi Sharad, I believe 2-in-a-box will work only if the two people have complimentary capabilities. Or their roles are made complementary (in spite of overlapping capabilities). Pair programming (XP) is a very good example of roles that are made complimentary. The complimentary capabilities can come from various factors such are their core competencies, their geographical location advantage, etc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Sharad, I believe 2-in-a-box will work only if the two people have complimentary capabilities. Or their roles are made complementary (in spite of overlapping capabilities). Pair programming (XP) is a very good example of roles that are made complimentary. The complimentary capabilities can come from various factors such are their core competencies, their geographical location advantage, etc.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.371 seconds -->
