Re: Why are we still allowing the term "Agile Project Manager"?
- I agree with Ron too. The challenge is in the choice of concepts and
I find I am successful by making the distinction between traditional
approaches to SW Dev, and the Agile approach. Here's the sequence
that works for me:
1. Get people laughing about how dysfunctional we have been and how
obviously more honest and valuable the Agile approach is.
2. Talk about the specific principles and practices of Scrum and XP
that deliver success and the reasons they do. Make this practical and
down-to-earth. I think his satisfies David's (ii) option.
3. Talk about our traditional terminology and its fit or not to the
4. Express a preference for the bizarre Scrum jargon because it gets
people to stop and think rather than drag along the baggage of
It's all about reality and trust from being 'real'.
No, it's not about common sense.
But it is definitely about sense.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "David Wolfe" <dwolfe66@...>
>the agile community to *fight the good fight* and evangelize and
> I think that Ron's point here goes to the crux of the matter.
> If we believe that in creating language to help *traditionalists*
> digest and adopt agile approaches we bastardize the fundamental
> principles of the approaches themselves, then we have some serious
> choices to make;
> (i) Stop searching for language to help make *transition* more
> palatable for our waterfall embracing brethren. Presumably this
> approach will support keeping agile *cleaner*
> (ii) Find better and more effective concepts and language
> (iii) ?
> I would vote for (ii) because I think it is the responsibility of
approach that has, at least, radically transformed my professional
existence. That being said, there is a fine line. Fact is agile is
different and as a result not all traditionalist concepts can be
co-opted for persuasive approaches.
>familiar terms like manager, project manager etc to even the a foot in
> David Wolfe
> CTO, Napster
> --- In email@example.com, Ron Jeffries
> <ronjeffries@> wrote:
> > Hello, Mike. On Monday, June 30, 2008, at 5:53:54 AM, you wrote:
> > > My view is that anything new usually has to court the mainstream
> to be widely adopted, as such you need to create a bridge with
> the door.what cost in doing it well?
> > And why do we want this new thing to be widely adopted, and at
> >do this stuff so that people who choose to adopt it do it well.
> > Perhaps our purpose should be to describe quite accurately how to
Perhaps making it easy to think you're entering isn't quite the right
> > Ron Jeffries
> > www.XProgramming.com
> > To Fly, Flip Away Backhanded -- Master Frisbee
- Hello, Robert. On Wednesday, July 2, 2008, at 11:19:55 AM, you
> Your earlier message said:OK. Why do /you/ think Scrum works.
>> Scrum works, in my opinion, because it requires two things:
>> 1. Produce Done-Done software on a regular basis;
>> 2. Remove every obstacle to doing item 1.
> I'm not sure I agree. In particular, it seems to suggest an absolute
> focus on
> software, and it seems to suggest seeing other things as obstacles to that.
> I think an important advantage of scrum, and other agileInteresting. What do you see in the definition of Scrum that leads
> processes, is that they involve software development in a wider
> context, and in that wider context the development of software is
> unlikely to be the priority.
you to believe it is not focused on software? A reference would be
> So the advantage for software development is that the process isSo that whole "Agile Software Development with Scrum" thing was just
> more likely to lead to software that helps in that larger context.
> This means it is important for everyone to realise that software
> development is not the ultimate goal, and that things that might
> seem like obstacles may in fact show aspects of the wider context
> that need to be better understood and may in fact change the
> nature of the software development.
what ... a typo?
I must create a system, or be enslaved by another man's;
I will not reason and compare; my business is to create. --William Blake