Don't expect results over night. :) Usually, the results are obvious after a full release cycle - mostly when you see that there are less bugs and, most importantly, the bugs are less severe. Another advantage I've seen is a lot less overtime. :)

In the end, it's all about better quality for less. And, in my opinion there are 3 very important things that get u there (beside agile, scrum, extreme, etc). These 3 can be applied even if nobody mentions agile this or that:
- Automated unit tests - the unit tests must be written when the main code is written and have to be run automatically by the build
- Code reviews - (almost) no line of code goes in without being reviewed by somebody who can actually understand it :)
- Continuos integration - automated build that runs continuosly (and runs the unit tests :) )

Another interesting quality improver that I've tried is design and code inspections. Since that has to be followed religiously to get results, it's sometimes very difficult to convince the team to do it.

Vlad

>Thanks. I plan on getting more training. I've read a lot online but seems training should help out a lot. I'm for the switch I just don't think we are going to get a big bang until we also add in test driven design. Our current QC takes over 600 hours to fully test a system release. Part of my resistant is pride in both I'm good at what I currently do (resit change) and I wasn't consulted in the switch pretty much just came top-down. I'm a big believer in build buy-in and not dictate. But since I do think it will be for the better I just need to try and move on :)
>
>>It's human nature to resist change and come up with reasons to not do something. You should start with some research and reading. Some of the things you've said about Scrum are correct, others are not. And I totally agree with Tracy. Get some training. See other responses inline....
>>