Re: Agile vs. non-Agile - the larger issues
The way I aproached RUP was as a repository of best practices, with
lot of guidelines and whitepapers, and a framework that could help me
understand the life cicle of a project, a very positive way to look at
it, probably as a result of no one telling me to follow it.
That was my relationship to RUP and he was a helper not a master, is
nice to have the advice of a lot of very experienced people on some
subjects, and that was the way a looked at it.
My aproach was a people oriented, people served by a process
framework, a huge repository that you should only pick what adds value
to your specific problem, then I saw thouse positive aspects of RUP.
When I went to the market to work with RUP in organizations other than
mine, I had a lot of problems with management as my view of RUP was
not at all aligned or compatible with the paradigm of 99,99% of RUP
implementations that where highly influenced by the "process is the
master" aproach, people serving not being served by a process.
In the future probably we will see some SCRUM implementations that no
matter how hard and alaud you talk about self organizing teams and all
that stuff they will get it wrong, again and again, as the basic most
profound paradigm hadn't changed, that see management as a system to
control things (including people) will be there shouting it's message,
no matter what practices they adopt.
Probably one of our current constraints in our society is, not only
highly specialized professionals, but more important highly effective
people oriented managers (leaders?), and this maybe one of the most
powerfull strategic advantages for the future.
--- In email@example.com, "Jeff Sutherland"
> The discussions on Agile vs. non-Agile, RUP vs non-RUP, PMI vs.
> non-PMI can be viewed in a larger context. Edward Deming brought
> quality processes to Japan and transformed U.S. industry. U.S.
> industry has failed to respond and Toyota will overtake GM next year.
> Scrum is an adaptation of mostly Japanese best practice with a little
> 3M and HP thrown in. So it has an historical relationship to Edward
> Deming, since he was a key factor in producing Japanese best practice.
> Here is what he has to say:
> "Our prevailing system of management has destroyed our people. People
> are born with intrinsic motivation, self-respect, dignity, curiosity
> to learn, joy in learning. The forces of destruction begin with
> toddlersa prize for the best halloween costume, grades in school,
> gold starsand on up through the university. On the job, people,
> teams, and divisions are ranked, rewarded for the top, punished for
> the bottom. Management by Objectives, quotas, incentive pay, business
> plans, put together separately, division by division, cause further
> loss, unknown and unknowable." Deming to Senge
> Peter Senge responds:
> "I believe that the prevailing system of management is, at its core,
> dedicated to mediocrity. If forces people to work harder and harder to
> compensate for failing to tap the spirit and collective intelligence
> that characterizes working together at its best." Peter Senge
> While it is theoretically possible to use RUP in a way that does not
> cause people to work harder to get less done, it is practically
> impossible. All things that cause people to work harder and harder to
> get less and less done are bad things. It is essentially a form of
> indentured servitude.
> Jeff Sutherland