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

Re: Steve Denning

Expand Messages
  • lszyrmer
    Kurt, There are two rather big reasons: 1. Because product lifecycles in most industries are shrinking, and agile techniques help companies respond much more
    Message 1 of 21 , Apr 18, 2012

      There are two rather big reasons:
      1. Because product lifecycles in most industries are shrinking, and agile techniques help companies respond much more effectively. Management, including project management, doesn't function in a vacuum. Marketing and what customers actually want is what drives sales which keeps companies going. Finance helps make sure that the company is making money. While agile seems focussed on producing software, it's more about getting cross functional involvement and open communication to produce great products quickly.
      2. Software is embedded in many non-software businesses, so the economics of software creation affects most of them. For example, a vet doesn't care how his software is made, but his business can be significantly improved if the software running his practice has relevant features he requested, and it works well. It's just become so transparent and ubiquitous that it's easy to forget how business looked, even in the 80s before the Internet. (Library "card catalogs" used to be everywhere). The people (Goldratt, Ohno) you cited were primarily from a manufacturing background, which is important, but rapidly becoming a much smaller part of the global economy.

      I guess what I'm saying is that software within a business underlies its competitive advantage, so an executive (ourside of software) will be more effective he/she really understands the agile angle. By this I mean not only the values but also the various framework tools, e.g. embedded real options.


      --- In scrumdevelopment@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Häusler <kurt.haeusler@...> wrote:
      > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Peter Stevens <peterstev@...> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > > Agile is the vanguard of a general change in management, beyond "just" software. At the moment, it is seldom on the radar screens of today's MBA trained managers.
      > No. People like Deming, Goldratt, Ohno, (and several others that I am
      > not yet that familiar with) are the vanguards of general change in
      > management (to the extent that there is yet much of a change), perhaps
      > being joined by some more recent ideas like rightshifting, beyong
      > budgeting, radical management, the "Stoos" movement etc . Agile is
      > just a realization of that change in the world of software.
      > I don't have an MBA, but I recently finished a post-graduate
      > management degree, and while Agile is great for developing and
      > delivering software, its nothing that anyone outside of software
      > development needs to be interested in. Agile should only be discussed
      > in relation to software development. However we certainly did pay
      > attention to agile-like ideas that are useful outside software
      > development, like systems and complexity thinking, servant leadership,
      > intrinsic motivation, Deming, TOC, the TPS, high trust cultures etc.
      > I wish people would stop trying to push Agile software development
      > down managers throats as if were somehow a better basis for an
      > organisational value system than all those good things that aren't so
      > software specific. It just makes the whole thing more confusing and
      > difficult.
      > Why push rocks uphill, and try and convince managers that Agile
      > software development is somehow the right thing to base their whole
      > organisation on? Why not just show them e.g. Deming's System of
      > Profound Knowledge, or explain servant leadership or systems thinking
      > instead?
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.