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

Re: !RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

Expand Messages
  • Ken Schwaber
    I think our job is to keep the baby alive, help it grow, and watch it mature and have a life, a real life, of its own. Ken
    Message 1 of 25 , Sep 1, 2004
      I think our job is to keep the baby alive, help it grow, and watch it mature and have a life, a real life, of its own.
      Ken
      >
      > From: "Mike Beedle" <beedlem@...>
      > Date: 2004/08/31 Tue PM 02:27:08 CDT
      > To: <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
      > Subject: !RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile
      >
      >
      > Ken/Daniel:
      >
      > Your postings reminded me of something I wrote a couple of years ago:
      >
      > "It troubles me that the _fundamental differences_ between traditional
      > and agile processes are not highlighted, either by the creators
      > and supporters of the Agile movement, or by traditional
      > software development figure-heads."
      > http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRevolution
      >
      >
      > " ...Agile Software Development will be in the 2000's what
      > Defined-Process Software Development was in the 1980's. Everyone
      > will be in favor of it. Every manufacturer will promote his
      > products as supporting it. Every manager will pay lip service
      > to it. Every programmer will practice it (differently).
      > And no one will know just what it is."
      > http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRentschianThinking
      >
      >
      > ..... unfortunately, "agile" is bound to go through that
      > irreversible cycle of commercialization that tends to evaporate
      > the meaning of valuable things as it has done with
      > "structured programming", "functional programming",
      > "object-oriented programming", "agent-technology", and now
      > "service-oriented architecture".
      >
      > Just like everything else that our industry has managed to
      > mangle, obfuscate, obscure, but simultaneously glamorize and
      > idolize, "agile development", like any other wave, will be
      > the prey of commercialization, opportunism, envy,
      > silver-bulleting, .... and the rest of the socio-economic
      > diseases of our time.
      >
      > Agile is dead, Long live Agile!
      >
      > - Mike
      >
      > (For some reason this discussion makes me think of the following poem
      > ;-)
      >
      > Could Be
      >
      > I only sang
      > because the lonely road was long;
      > and now the road and I are gone
      > but not the song.
      > I only spoke
      > the verse to pay for borrowed time
      > and now the clock and I are broken
      > but not the rhyme.
      > Possibly,
      > the self not being fundamental,
      > eternity
      > breathes only on the incidental.
      >
      > -- Ernesto Galarza (1905-1984)
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Daniel Gackle [mailto:gackle@...]
      > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 12:10 PM
      > To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile
      >
      >
      > Ken,
      >
      > I agree. Reading those articles, I was astonished at how contentless
      > they are. It's impossible to figure out what they mean by "agile"
      > because, IMHO, they don't mean anything by it. A precise translation
      > might be "buzz buzz buzz".
      >
      > Perhaps this is an inevitable stage in the lifecycle of any movement
      > that reaches a certain mass. If so, we can expect this wave of
      > misunderstanding to continue. What matters is that enough of the core
      > value manage to survive it. The key place to preserve this value is in
      > our own individual and team practice.
      >
      > This relates to the conversation about "selling agile". The risk in
      > selling agile is that only the word will be bought and exchanged, not
      > the core. (For this we now have Exhibit A: CIO magazine.) This will make
      > some people some money, but it will not bring what many of us would most
      > like to see from Agile, which someone expressed to me recently as
      > "making software projects less soul-destroying".
      >
      > You can bottle the bathwater, but not the baby.
      >
      > - Daniel
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
      > Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 1:34 am
      > Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Digest Number 701
      >
      > There is a whole issue of CIO magazine devoted to "agile"
      > (http://www.cio.com/archive/081504/index.html). When we held the meeting
      > in Snowbird in 2001, Martin Fowler suggested that we name the thing
      > "quackenpoof" rather than "agile" to discourage other people from
      > cheaply using the name, as the have in this issue of CIO. "Oh, yes,
      > goodness sakes, we are doing much better in my "100 Most Agile"
      > organization... we now get the software out the door sometimes."
      >
      > I'd have been so much more pleased if one of these people had a clue
      > about Agile rather than just the word agile. So, remember that when you
      > discuss agile, if you are referring to the commercialization fad that
      > will fade in about two years, use the small "a" agile. When you are
      > referring to something that comforms to the Agile movement and the Agile
      > manifesto, use the capital "A" Agile.
      >
      > Scrum on,
      > Ken
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
      > scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Clarke Ching
      ... Or we could sell the baby to gypsies, take the money and run.
      Message 2 of 25 , Sep 1, 2004
        > From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
        >
        > I think our job is to keep the baby alive, help it grow, and
        > watch it mature and have a life, a real life, of its own.
        > Ken

        Or we could sell the baby to gypsies, take the money and run.
      • Hubert Smits
        Clarke! We re not all from Linlithgow. Behave! ... -- Hubert hubert.smits@gmail.com
        Message 3 of 25 , Sep 1, 2004
          Clarke! We're not all from Linlithgow. Behave!

          On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 15:32:53 +0100, Clarke Ching <lists@...> wrote:
          > > From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
          > >
          > > I think our job is to keep the baby alive, help it grow, and
          > > watch it mature and have a life, a real life, of its own.
          > > Ken
          >
          > Or we could sell the baby to gypsies, take the money and run.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
          > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
          > Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >


          --
          Hubert

          hubert.smits@...
        • Garnett, Steve
          Tim, Yes, everyone associated with the project believes it has been brilliant. The business are far more confident and happy with the functionality built, its
          Message 4 of 25 , Sep 1, 2004

            Tim,

             

            Yes, everyone associated with the project believes it has been brilliant. The business are far more confident and happy with the functionality built, its been built to budget, and we’ve been able to incorporate change by managing the product backlog effectively…

             

            My company is enthusiastic about using Scrum and XP on future projects, however, I can’t quantify the benefits of using agile over traditional to customers.

             

            The best we’ll have is an excellent case study, which is useful but it is the clear bottom-line quantification that is needed rather than customer and team testimonies.

             

            Cheers,

             

            Steve

             


            From: Tim Marston [mailto:t.marston@...]
            Sent: 01 September 2004 11:04
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

             

            Steve,

             

                Has this first project been a success, which you are now able to proffer as evidence to the less enthusiastic areas?

             

            Tim

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Garnett, Steve [mailto:steve.garnett@...]
            Sent: 01 September 2004 09:45
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

            Mike,

             

            I’ve been reading the thread on agile v Agile whilst trying to articulate and “sell” Agile within my company and to prospective customers. I have recently completed my first project as scrum master.

             

            The way I have begun to see scrum mastering versus traditional project management is similar to the difference between transactional and transformational leadership, and similar in consequence between hierarchical/process organizations and flat-structured/cultural organizations.

             

            It is by using “metaphors” such as these that I am finding some traction with the “unconverted hordes”.

             

            The problem I’m having with “selling” Agile is that most of my customers think in a traditional way, the rationalism of Weber… This is leading the marketing team to sell Agile techniques using traditional language.

             

            How can I articulate the difference that self-organization makes to a team versus command and control structures without evidence!

             

            I am swiftly coming to the conclusion that the only way we will “sell” Agile is to do so by example. Until there is clear proof of its value, the dominant logic of the IT industry will be to load the front-end of projects with planning, and play the “cover my back” game with risks and issues logs.

             

            I think the best way forward is to introduce Agile methods covertly, starting with the incremental introduction of XP development practices by the team and then over-laying it with Scrum once you’ve got enough stakeholders on board. There will always be some customers open to an Agile approach from the outset, but particularly in the UK these are few and far between.

             

            The important thing is to maintain groups like this, and particularly the agile alliance to ensure there is a “pure” source somewhere!

             

            Regards,

             

            Steve  

             


            From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
            Sent: 31 August 2004 20:27
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: !RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

             


            Ken/Daniel:

            Your postings reminded me of something I wrote a couple of years ago:

            "It troubles me that the _fundamental differences_ between traditional
            and agile processes are not highlighted, either by the creators
            and supporters of the Agile movement, or by traditional
            software development figure-heads."
            http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRevolution


            " ...Agile Software Development will be in the 2000's what
            Defined-Process Software Development was in the 1980's. Everyone
            will be in favor of it. Every manufacturer will promote his
            products as supporting it. Every manager will pay lip service
            to it. Every programmer will practice it (differently).
            And no one will know just what it is."
            http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRentschianThinking


            ..... unfortunately, "agile" is bound to go through that
            irreversible cycle of commercialization that tends to evaporate
            the meaning of valuable things as it has done with
            "structured programming", "functional programming",
            "object-oriented programming", "agent-technology", and now
            "service-oriented architecture".

            Just like everything else that our industry has managed to
            mangle, obfuscate, obscure, but simultaneously glamorize and
            idolize, "agile development", like any other wave, will be
            the prey of commercialization, opportunism, envy,
            silver-bulleting, .... and the rest of the socio-economic
            diseases of our time.

            Agile is dead, Long live Agile!

            - Mike

            (For some reason this discussion makes me think of the following poem
            ;-)

            Could Be

            I only sang
            because the lonely road was long;
            and now the road and I are gone
            but not the song.
            I only spoke
            the verse to pay for borrowed time
            and now the clock and I are broken
            but not the rhyme.
            Possibly,
            the self not being fundamental,
            eternity
            breathes only on the incidental.

                  -- Ernesto Galarza (1905-1984)

            -----Original Message-----
            From: Daniel Gackle [mailto:gackle@...]
            Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 12:10 PM
            To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile


            Ken,

            I agree. Reading those articles, I was astonished at how contentless
            they are.  It's impossible to figure out what they mean by "agile"
            because, IMHO, they don't mean anything by it. A precise translation
            might be "buzz buzz buzz".

            Perhaps this is an inevitable stage in the lifecycle of any movement
            that reaches a certain mass. If so, we can expect this wave of
            misunderstanding to continue. What matters is that enough of the core
            value manage to survive it. The key place to preserve this value is in
            our own individual and team practice.

            This relates to the conversation about "selling agile". The risk in
            selling agile is that only the word will be bought and exchanged, not
            the core. (For this we now have Exhibit A: CIO magazine.) This will make
            some people some money, but it will not bring what many of us would most
            like to see from Agile, which someone expressed to me recently as
            "making software projects less soul-destroying".

            You can bottle the bathwater, but not the baby.

            - Daniel


            ----- Original Message -----
            From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 1:34 am
            Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Digest Number 701

            There is a whole issue of CIO magazine devoted to "agile"
            (http://www.cio.com/archive/081504/index.html). When we held the meeting
            in Snowbird in 2001, Martin Fowler suggested that we name the thing
            "quackenpoof" rather than "agile" to discourage other people from
            cheaply using the name, as the have in this issue of CIO. "Oh, yes,
            goodness sakes, we are doing much better in my "100 Most Agile"
            organization... we now get the software out the door sometimes."

            I'd have been so much more pleased if one of these people had a clue
            about Agile rather than just the word agile. So, remember that when you
            discuss agile, if you are referring to the commercialization fad that
            will fade in about two years, use the small "a" agile. When you are
            referring to something that comforms to the Agile movement and the Agile
            manifesto, use the capital "A" Agile.

            Scrum on,
            Ken




            To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
            scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


            Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            ADVERTISEMENT






            Yahoo! Groups Links

            To visit your group on the web, go to:
            http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/
             
            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
             
            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




            To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...




            _____________________________________________________________________
            This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MessageLabs. The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify Conchango plc as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is prohibited and may be unlawful. The internet cannot guarantee the integrity of this message and therefore Conchango plc will not be liable for the message if modified.

            Reg. Heritage House, Church Road , Egham, Surrey , TW20 9QD T 44 (0) 1784 222 222 F 44 (0) 1784 222 200 E talktous@... No. 2598884


            To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...




            To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
            To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...





            _____________________________________________________________________
            This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MessageLabs. The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify Conchango plc as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is prohibited and may be unlawful. The internet cannot guarantee the integrity of this message and therefore Conchango plc will not be liable for the message if modified.

            Reg. Heritage House, Church Road, Egham, Surrey, TW20 9QD T 44 (0) 1784 222 222 F 44 (0) 1784 222 200 E talktous@... No. 2598884
          • Deb
            What! Out there in the big world without us! Shocking. auntie Deb ... it mature and have a life, a real life, of its own.
            Message 5 of 25 , Sep 1, 2004
              What! Out there in the big world without us!
              Shocking.

              auntie Deb

              --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Ken Schwaber
              <ken.schwaber@v...> wrote:
              > I think our job is to keep the baby alive, help it grow, and watch
              it mature and have a life, a real life, of its own.
              > Ken
            • Mike Beedle
              Ken: Well said, *true* Agile and Scrum practitioners will keep the flame burning -- even if the word is abused elsewhere, - Mike ... From: Ken Schwaber
              Message 6 of 25 , Sep 1, 2004
                Ken:

                Well said, *true* Agile and Scrum practitioners will keep the
                flame burning -- even if the word is abused elsewhere,

                - Mike

                -----Original Message-----
                From: Ken Schwaber [mailto:ken.schwaber@...]
                Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 9:27 AM
                To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: !RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile


                I think our job is to keep the baby alive, help it grow, and
                watch it mature and have a life, a real life, of its own.
                Ken

                >
                > From: "Mike Beedle" <beedlem@...>
                > Date: 2004/08/31 Tue PM 02:27:08 CDT
                > To: <scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com>
                > Subject: !RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile
                >
                >
                > Ken/Daniel:
                >
                > Your postings reminded me of something I wrote a couple of years ago:
                >
                > "It troubles me that the _fundamental differences_ between traditional

                > and agile processes are not highlighted, either by the creators
                > and supporters of the Agile movement, or by traditional
                > software development figure-heads."
                > http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRevolution
                >
                >
                > " ...Agile Software Development will be in the 2000's what
                > Defined-Process Software Development was in the 1980's. Everyone
                > will be in favor of it. Every manufacturer will promote his
                > products as supporting it. Every manager will pay lip service
                > to it. Every programmer will practice it (differently).
                > And no one will know just what it is."
                > http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRentschianThinking
                >
                >
                > ..... unfortunately, "agile" is bound to go through that
                > irreversible cycle of commercialization that tends to evaporate
                > the meaning of valuable things as it has done with
                > "structured programming", "functional programming",
                > "object-oriented programming", "agent-technology", and now
                > "service-oriented architecture".
                >
                > Just like everything else that our industry has managed to
                > mangle, obfuscate, obscure, but simultaneously glamorize and
                > idolize, "agile development", like any other wave, will be
                > the prey of commercialization, opportunism, envy,
                > silver-bulleting, .... and the rest of the socio-economic
                > diseases of our time.
                >
                > Agile is dead, Long live Agile!
                >
                > - Mike
                >
                > (For some reason this discussion makes me think of the following poem
                > ;-)
                >
                > Could Be
                >
                > I only sang
                > because the lonely road was long;
                > and now the road and I are gone
                > but not the song.
                > I only spoke
                > the verse to pay for borrowed time
                > and now the clock and I are broken
                > but not the rhyme.
                > Possibly,
                > the self not being fundamental,
                > eternity
                > breathes only on the incidental.
                >
                > -- Ernesto Galarza (1905-1984)
                >
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: Daniel Gackle [mailto:gackle@...]
                > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 12:10 PM
                > To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile
                >
                >
                > Ken,
                >
                > I agree. Reading those articles, I was astonished at how contentless
                > they are. It's impossible to figure out what they mean by "agile"
                > because, IMHO, they don't mean anything by it. A precise translation
                > might be "buzz buzz buzz".
                >
                > Perhaps this is an inevitable stage in the lifecycle of any movement
                > that reaches a certain mass. If so, we can expect this wave of
                > misunderstanding to continue. What matters is that enough of the core
                > value manage to survive it. The key place to preserve this value is in
                > our own individual and team practice.
                >
                > This relates to the conversation about "selling agile". The risk in
                > selling agile is that only the word will be bought and exchanged, not
                > the core. (For this we now have Exhibit A: CIO magazine.) This will
                make
                > some people some money, but it will not bring what many of us would
                most
                > like to see from Agile, which someone expressed to me recently as
                > "making software projects less soul-destroying".
                >
                > You can bottle the bathwater, but not the baby.
                >
                > - Daniel
                >
                >
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                > Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 1:34 am
                > Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Digest Number 701
                >
                > There is a whole issue of CIO magazine devoted to "agile"
                > (http://www.cio.com/archive/081504/index.html). When we held the
                meeting
                > in Snowbird in 2001, Martin Fowler suggested that we name the thing
                > "quackenpoof" rather than "agile" to discourage other people from
                > cheaply using the name, as the have in this issue of CIO. "Oh, yes,
                > goodness sakes, we are doing much better in my "100 Most Agile"
                > organization... we now get the software out the door sometimes."
                >
                > I'd have been so much more pleased if one of these people had a clue
                > about Agile rather than just the word agile. So, remember that when
                you
                > discuss agile, if you are referring to the commercialization fad that
                > will fade in about two years, use the small "a" agile. When you are
                > referring to something that comforms to the Agile movement and the
                Agile
                > manifesto, use the capital "A" Agile.
                >
                > Scrum on,
                > Ken
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                > scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                > ADVERTISEMENT
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                > To visit your group on the web, go to:
                > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >



                To Post a message, send it to: scrumdevelopment@...
                To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


                Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                ADVERTISEMENT






                Yahoo! Groups Links

                To visit your group on the web, go to:
                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/

                To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
              • Doug Shimp
                Hi Tim, ... Has anyone ever done this? Is the quantification for the traditional methods on any better ground as a basis for using in software development than
                Message 7 of 25 , Sep 1, 2004

                  Hi Tim,

                   

                  >>  quantify the benefits of using agile over traditional to customers.

                   

                   Has anyone ever done this? Is the quantification for the traditional methods on any better ground as a basis for using in software development than Scrum or Agile?

                   

                  What has been measured

                  The traditional methods have been marginally (at best) successful in justifying their position quantitatively. They have tried to measure the business value derived from producing a system and mapping it to the methods involved. At best, they have made rough large grained measurements of the benefit but, they have not made a reliable mapping to the individual methods involved.

                   

                  What is interesting is that we can still use their argument…

                  Scrum/Agile practices can be considered as a subset of these traditional methods. Many of these traditional methods could be called the “IT Process of Everything”. We have found that these traditional methods are over complicated, create confusion and we spend far more energy tailoring them than using them. Scrum/Agile can be considered to focus on the minimal set of methods necessary to successfully achieve business objectives.

                   

                  How does Scrum help…

                  Scrum helps us focus on what our product needs. Scrum/Agile is not something new; rather it is a clear minimal set of methods that our industry has found to be useful in getting the job done. Scrum helps us focus on those methods that are needed to produce product within our given environment and helps us eliminate those methods that get in the way. Our industry has found that it is far easier to extend a body of knowledge than it is to reduce it to what is needed. Scrum helps us by starting with a minimal set. That’s what makes it beautiful, enticing and useful.

                   

                   

                   

                   

                  _________________________________

                   

                  Douglas Shimp

                  Senior Consultant

                  doug_shimp@...

                  414.839.2933

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Garnett, Steve [mailto:steve.garnett@...]
                  Sent
                  : Wednesday, September 01, 2004 10:58 AM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

                   

                  Tim,

                   

                  Yes, everyone associated with the project believes it has been brilliant. The business are far more confident and happy with the functionality built, its been built to budget, and we’ve been able to incorporate change by managing the product backlog effectively…

                   

                  My company is enthusiastic about using Scrum and XP on future projects, however, I can’t quantify the benefits of using agile over traditional to customers.

                   

                  The best we’ll have is an excellent case study, which is useful but it is the clear bottom-line quantification that is needed rather than customer and team testimonies.

                   

                  Cheers,

                   

                  Steve

                   


                  From: Tim Marston [mailto:t.marston@...]
                  Sent: 01 September 2004 11:04
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

                   

                  Steve,

                   

                      Has this first project been a success, which you are now able to proffer as evidence to the less enthusiastic areas?

                   

                  Tim

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Garnett, Steve [mailto:steve.garnett@...]
                  Sent: 01 September 2004 09:45
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

                  Mike,

                   

                  I’ve been reading the thread on agile v Agile whilst trying to articulate and “sell” Agile within my company and to prospective customers. I have recently completed my first project as scrum master.

                   

                  The way I have begun to see scrum mastering versus traditional project management is similar to the difference between transactional and transformational leadership, and similar in consequence between hierarchical/process organizations and flat-structured/cultural organizations.

                   

                  It is by using “metaphors” such as these that I am finding some traction with the “unconverted hordes”.

                   

                  The problem I’m having with “selling” Agile is that most of my customers think in a traditional way, the rationalism of Weber… This is leading the marketing team to sell Agile techniques using traditional language.

                   

                  How can I articulate the difference that self-organization makes to a team versus command and control structures without evidence!

                   

                  I am swiftly coming to the conclusion that the only way we will “sell” Agile is to do so by example. Until there is clear proof of its value, the dominant logic of the IT industry will be to load the front-end of projects with planning, and play the “cover my back” game with risks and issues logs.

                   

                  I think the best way forward is to introduce Agile methods covertly, starting with the incremental introduction of XP development practices by the team and then over-laying it with Scrum once you’ve got enough stakeholders on board. There will always be some customers open to an Agile approach from the outset, but particularly in the UK these are few and far between.

                   

                  The important thing is to maintain groups like this, and particularly the agile alliance to ensure there is a “pure” source somewhere!

                   

                  Regards,

                   

                  Steve  

                   


                  From: Mike Beedle [mailto:beedlem@...]
                  Sent: 31 August 2004 20:27
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: !RE: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile

                   


                  Ken/Daniel:

                  Your postings reminded me of something I wrote a couple of years ago:

                  "It troubles me that the _fundamental differences_ between traditional
                  and agile processes are not highlighted, either by the creators
                  and supporters of the Agile movement, or by traditional
                  software development figure-heads."
                  http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRevolution


                  " ...Agile Software Development will be in the 2000's what
                  Defined-Process Software Development was in the 1980's. Everyone
                  will be in favor of it. Every manufacturer will promote his
                  products as supporting it. Every manager will pay lip service
                  to it. Every programmer will practice it (differently).
                  And no one will know just what it is."
                  http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AgileRentschianThinking


                  ..... unfortunately, "agile" is bound to go through that
                  irreversible cycle of commercialization that tends to evaporate
                  the meaning of valuable things as it has done with
                  "structured programming", "functional programming",
                  "object-oriented programming", "agent-technology", and now
                  "service-oriented architecture".

                  Just like everything else that our industry has managed to
                  mangle, obfuscate, obscure, but simultaneously glamorize and
                  idolize, "agile development", like any other wave, will be
                  the prey of commercialization, opportunism, envy,
                  silver-bulleting, .... and the rest of the socio-economic
                  diseases of our time.

                  Agile is dead, Long live Agile!

                  - Mike

                  (For some reason this discussion makes me think of the following poem
                  ;-)

                  Could Be

                  I only sang
                  because the lonely road was long;
                  and now the road and I are gone
                  but not the song.
                  I only spoke
                  the verse to pay for borrowed time
                  and now the clock and I are broken
                  but not the rhyme.
                  Possibly,
                  the self not being fundamental,
                  eternity
                  breathes only on the incidental.

                        -- Ernesto Galarza (1905-1984)

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: Daniel Gackle [mailto:gackle@...]
                  Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 12:10 PM
                  To: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [scrumdevelopment] RE: agile vs Agile


                  Ken,

                  I agree. Reading those articles, I was astonished at how contentless
                  they are.  It's impossible to figure out what they mean by "agile"
                  because, IMHO, they don't mean anything by it. A precise translation
                  might be "buzz buzz buzz".

                  Perhaps this is an inevitable stage in the lifecycle of any movement
                  that reaches a certain mass. If so, we can expect this wave of
                  misunderstanding to continue. What matters is that enough of the core
                  value manage to survive it. The key place to preserve this value is in
                  our own individual and team practice.

                  This relates to the conversation about "selling agile". The risk in
                  selling agile is that only the word will be bought and exchanged, not
                  the core. (For this we now have Exhibit A: CIO magazine.) This will make
                  some people some money, but it will not bring what many of us would most
                  like to see from Agile, which someone expressed to me recently as
                  "making software projects less soul-destroying".

                  You can bottle the bathwater, but not the baby.

                  - Daniel


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 1:34 am
                  Subject: [scrumdevelopment] Digest Number 701

                  There is a whole issue of CIO magazine devoted to "agile"
                  (http://www.cio.com/archive/081504/index.html). When we held the meeting
                  in Snowbird in 2001, Martin Fowler suggested that we name the thing
                  "quackenpoof" rather than "agile" to discourage other people from
                  cheaply using the name, as the have in this issue of CIO. "Oh, yes,
                  goodness sakes, we are doing much better in my "100 Most Agile"
                  organization... we now get the software out the door sometimes."

                  I'd have been so much more pleased if one of these people had a clue
                  about Agile rather than just the word agile. So, remember that when you
                  discuss agile, if you are referring to the commercialization fad that
                  will fade in about two years, use the small "a" agile. When you are
                  referring to something that comforms to the Agile movement and the Agile
                  manifesto, use the capital "A" Agile.

                  Scrum on,
                  Ken




                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
                  scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...


                  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                  ADVERTISEMENT






                  Yahoo! Groups Links

                  To visit your group on the web, go to:
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/
                   
                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                   
                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.




                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...



                  _____________________________________________________________________
                  This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MessageLabs. The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify Conchango plc as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is prohibited and may be unlawful. The internet cannot guarantee the integrity of this message and therefore Conchango plc will not be liable for the message if modified.

                  Reg. Heritage House, Church Road, Egham, Surrey, TW20 9QD T 44 (0) 1784 222 222 F 44 (0) 1784 222 200 E talktous@... No. 2598884


                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...



                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...




                  _____________________________________________________________________
                  This e-mail has been scanned for viruses by MessageLabs. The information contained in this message is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you have received this message in error, please notify Conchango plc as soon as possible. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this message is prohibited and may be unlawful. The internet cannot guarantee the integrity of this message and therefore Conchango plc will not be liable for the message if modified.

                  Reg. Heritage House, Church Road, Egham, Surrey, TW20 9QD T 44 (0) 1784 222 222 F 44 (0) 1784 222 200 E talktous@... No. 2598884


                  To Post a message, send it to:   scrumdevelopment@...
                  To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: scrumdevelopment-unsubscribe@...





                  ______________________________________________________________________
                  This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
                  For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
                  ______________________________________________________________________

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