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

The Survey was Re: Agile 2.0

Expand Messages
  • Giora Morein
    ... BeckfordP I couldn t agree with you more. What many large companies and practitioners are calling Agile is far from the Agile value-system that you and
    Message 1 of 41 , Aug 1, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, "beckfordp" <beckfordp@...>
      wrote:

      >
      > In summary, the label is not the thing. So just because the label
      > "Agile" is gaining in popularity, it doesn't mean that the thing,
      > namely a philosophy, values and principles for software development is
      > becoming more prominent. In fact I see evidence of the opposite.

      BeckfordP

      I couldn't agree with you more. What many large companies and
      practitioners are calling "Agile" is far from the Agile value-system
      that you and I believe in. Even at Agile2006 in some of the
      interactions I had with folks, it was clear that there was very little
      understanding of what the principles and values are. I find that many
      times this results when following a slow incremental adoption model
      starting with some key technical practices (usually from XP), such as
      TDD and CI. Many companies will implement unit testing and CI into
      their existing development processes and then slowly add other
      individual practices without understanding or examining their purpose
      and how they fit into the holistic Agile process.

      Many times companies adopting Agile for the first time are receiving
      poor guidance or coaching. There are a number of consultancies out
      there making a mad dash at this land-grab and in the process putting
      in front of clients these so-called Agile "Experts" with little
      understanding and knowledge.

      One of the key things I learned at Agile2006 is the following:
      "The biggest threat to Agile is not the anti-aligist or the
      pro-waterfaller, it is in fact the poor agilist"

      Giora Morein
      gmorein@...
    • 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
      • 0 Attachment
        --- 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.