Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Agile 2.0

Expand Messages
  • Marco Abis
    Please tell me it s a joke :-) Scott Ambler has published some interesting data related to a surveys done via Dr. Dobb s Journal. Questions, raw data and
    Message 1 of 41 , Jul 29, 2006
      Please tell me it's a joke :-)

      Scott Ambler has published some interesting data related to a surveys
      done via Dr. Dobb's Journal. Questions, raw data and summary here
      http://www.ambysoft.com/surveys/

      In the last slide of the summary presentation (ppt) I read: "There
      was a statistical correlation between adoption of "Agile 2.0" methods
      such as Agile Unified Process (AUP) or MSF Agile and adoption of
      Agile Model Driven Development (AMDD)"

      Please please please can we try to avoid such a thing as Agile 2.0?
      And who says that AUP, MSF Agile and AAMD are Agile 2.0? what do
      we/you/they mean by Agile 2.0? I still am not sure AUP and MSF Agile
      are "Agile 1.0"... ;-)


      Marco Abis

      "let's not talk about Type A Scrum unless we also want to talk
      about Type W Scrum, which is more commonly called Waterfall" (Mike Cohn)

      http://www.agilemovement.it :: Italian Agile Movement
    • Mike Beedle
      ... Giora, Good points.... but, there is also a valid point in highlighting that the basic Agile single-project techniques DO NOT satisfy the requirements of
      Message 41 of 41 , Aug 10, 2006
        --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "gioramorein" <gmorein@...>
        wrote:

        > So maybe when we hear these offensive terms like "New Agile",
        > "Enterprise Agile" or "Agile 2.0" we consider that they may not refer
        > to a change in Agile itself, but rather a change in who and where it
        > is being used.
        >
        > Giora Morein
        > gmorein@...


        Giora,

        Good points.... but, there is also a valid point in highlighting
        that the basic Agile single-project techniques DO NOT satisfy
        the requirements of enterprise development, and that there are
        also "advanced agile techniques", not necessarily included in
        Scrum (Agile == Scrum 1.0, XP == cheap copy of Scrum without credit,
        other methods sorry but NOT Agile enough). [NOTE to Ron: Please
        send your standard insults in direct messages to me, and don't waste
        the group's bandwith.]

        For example, from the enteprise perspective, 1) Super-sprints
        that include simultanous testing and release of multiple applications
        with reusable functionality across different projects (each with their
        own Scrum), and from the "advanced agile techniques" side
        2) structured "green hat" sessions, to compare alternative designs
        in a single project; are good exmaples of these enterprise
        or advanced agile techniques. Other examples are the late
        contributions from Jeff Sutherland, and the many unexploited
        managment and social techniques derived from agent technologies.

        But all this is well known among Scrum practitioners:

        We are not done with Agile...
        We need more for the enterprise, and
        We can improve even the single project techniques

        However, what the skeptics and anti-brandists confuse, is the fact
        that some of us, that for lack of better words I am going to call
        the "enterprise or advance agile developers", have found over time
        some techniques that apply to managing multiple project
        simultaneously, or more techniques to manage individual projects.

        But for those contributions we get the privilege to be
        insulted as "brandists", "opportunists", or worse.

        We need to "open our minds" and continue to let innovation take
        place. We need to stop the overzealous restrain of creativity
        and open ourselves to NEW and IMPROVED ideas (yes, while giving
        FULL credit to everthing done in the past!!!)

        Until then, we will continue to dwell in mediocrity, bashing
        and restraining people accusing them of things like:

        * it has been done before -- let us find NEW and OLD patterns!
        * you are branding! (who cares if they brand! Let them try
        new things and follow the course of adaptation)

        Change is the only constant... Agile 1.0, or 2.0 or 3.0,
        cannot be constant, or cannot be just "one way"...
        we thrive in diversity, in cooperation but also in competition.

        End of rant,

        - Mike
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.