Re: [scrumdevelopment] Why are we still allowing the term "Agile Project Manager
- On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 6:42 PM, aalanatlas <alanatat@...> wrote:
> Perhaps this is a bit too pedestrian, but maybe we just need a betterno, agile is not ok either. Agile, as used in the context described
> term for this role that Jim and Doug have described? I think that role
> exists, too, and I agree that Agile Project Manager is an unfortunate
> name for it, but I don't think anybody suggested a different term yet.
> So, let's see. We don't like the word "Project", we don't like the
> word "Manager", and we don't like the phrase "Project Manager". But
> "Agile" is OK. What to do?
above, is going to be understood to be an attribute. That attribute is
already overloaded with a different meaning, quite clearly defined:
"ag·ile Audio Help /ˈædʒəl, -aɪl/ Pronunciation Key - Show
Spelled Pronunciation[aj-uhl, -ahyl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA
1. quick and well-coordinated in movement; lithe: an agile leap.
2. active; lively: an agile person.
3. marked by an ability to think quickly; mentally acute or aware:
She's 95 and still very agile. "
apart from maybe three, I do not see anything directly pertaining to a
person which has an agile mindset as described in the agile manifesto.
> Agile Release Leader might be a good name for this role.Why would you insist on having a role? Why "tack" the attribute agile
in front of another well established phrase?
>A lot ofI doubt we do, if we did why are there so few out tere teaching and
> agile folks seem to have become less happy with the use of the word
> "project" lately, but everybody seems to agree that we still work on
> releases when we're working on software. We already understand the
> concept of agile leadership fairly well, including the philosophy of
> "servant leadership".
Sent from gmail so do not trust this communication.
Do not send me sensitive information here, ask for my none-gmail accounts.
"Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
- 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