Jimi,

Here is a very personal opinion :

1.
Once you need XP you are already in some kind of trouble. Hence, you are out of control, and the quality of the persons (but say procedures) working around you, isn't right.

2.
Obviously XP has the objective of quality. Well, as long as you accept overhead, you're okay.

3.
The above implies that it can be done otherwise :
a. have strict rules on how to develop software;
b. never let work persons together on one outlined subject (!?!)
c. therefor have self-containing objects as the product to develop;
d. never think that objects will be too large for one person;
e. skip explicit communicating, but document (very) well.
f. let all participants in the project be 100 % responsible for their work.

Challengeing huh ?
We just do that, and it's the opposite of XP.
All what we do is beyond any normal life or expectations of it. The app we created and maintain (as well as the number of users we support), usually needs hundreds of people. We are some handful only.

Note that you won't be able to apply this easily.
But anyway, opposed to this, XP costs lots of money only.
Have the 100 % quality in the base, and XP is just superfluous.

Peter

>Hello everybody,
>
>anyone here is working with extreme programming? what do you think about it? we're still trying to find a way for the development team to follow, and hence be able to work effciently.
>
>would anyone please share his/her experience with us?
>
>thanks,
>jimi