Anti-Management? No, Different Management. A Twitter thread asked whether and why “Agile” often seems anti-management. Here, lightly edited, are my thoughts on that. Agile Software Development, as contemplated by the Agile Manifesto, isn’t anti-management. It’s much more radical than that: it’s a quite different approach to management. Agile Software Development remains a much more radical proposal than is even recognized today, including, rather unfortunately, by most of the branded approaches and, in my somewhat old man shouting at cloud viewpoint, by most of the smaller “Agile” purveyors as well.
Agile Software Development, as we defined it, calls for daily collaboration between “business” and “developers” in the frequent, sustainable creation of working software. It calls for those teams to be self-organizing, and specifically says: “The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.” This is not “anti” management. Is Agile anti-management? But I want to suggest that the bottom line is this: Scaling Agile @ Spotify with Henrik Kniberg. There Is No “Should” In Agile | Susan K DiFabio. Really, Can You Be Agile and Not Disciplined? Sometimes people tell me, “Wow, you’re so disciplined!”
And then I think, “How do you stay sane when you’re not?” Last week, it happened again. On Facebook I posted a screenshot of the huge checklist that I use as a quality assurance gate for my book chapters. Some people commented that this looked quite disciplined. Frankly speaking, I don’t see what’s so special about my discipline. If you want to be agile you have to be disciplined! I don’t see how it can be any different. Agility versus Discipline Ever since Barry Boehm published his badly titled book Balancing Agility and Discipline, people have offered different views on the discipline issue in Agile communities. Probably, all of them have good points. Check the work processes of a dozen Scrum teams and I bet you will find that most Scrum teams do not have a properly defined Definition of Done. Apparently, in software teams this view is uncommon. Agility Needs Discipline I respond to change by updating my checklists. Get the book!
12 Key Agile Assumptions. Written by Mike Cottmeyer Tuesday, 11 January 2011 02:08 Last time we talked about the attributes of successful agile teams. I did that post because sometimes I think we get hung up on implementing some set specific practices, just because we think that’s what it means to be agile. My belief is that agile isn’t about adopting any one set of practices. Agile isn’t really about adopting practices at all. Agile is about being able to get feedback and respond to change. It’s about building products our customers want and are willing to pay us for. Somehow, I believe that if we can shift our focus away from installing specific practices, and more toward making sure whatever practices we choose lead to the desired business outcomes, we will have a much better chance of being successful.
In short, the idea that installing some set of specific practices make us agile is just wrong. Here is our list of 12 common assumptions agile methodologies are making about your company: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 12 Key Knowledge Areas for Agile. Written by Mike Cottmeyer Thursday, 13 January 2011 05:08 I think this is going to be my last 12 point list for the week. It’s not like I’m out of time or anything… the snow melted a little yesterday… but we are still pretty much iced in. We are going to brave heading out to the grocery store this afternoon and maybe have lunch out again. Past that, we are all hunkered down hoping that the sun comes out and warms us up a bit. Okay… so today’s post we are going to talk about the knowledge areas, or schools of thought, we’re going to want to consider as we plan our adoption and transformation strategy (see… it’s easy to tangle the words up). 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. So… this is the stuff that I draw from as I think through these problems and try to untangle this a bit. 5 Comments.
Failure IS an Option. This is an article asking you to fail. More precisely: Fail now for greater success later. One of the five Scrum values is courage. Courage to point out problems, ask for help, receive help, and — most important — take risks even though you know you might fail. In fact, short-term failure is common to Agile's "inspect and adapt" practice. We all know that once we inspect and adapt a new practice, there's a high chance the practice still won't work as desired, and then we'll drop it and seek a better approach. Ironically, past glories may lower our ability to achieve further success, because we're fearful that any potential failure will overshadow that previous success. While it's human nature to fear failure, it is not impossible to overcome this fear. Here's a well-documented example: In 2000, Virgin Atlantic Airways attempted to introduce "sleep seats" in business class.
Using the skills of the entire team is important, too. Your Path through Agile Fluency. Agile methods are solidly in the mainstream, but that popularity hasn't been without its problems. Organizational leaders are complaining that they're not getting the benefits from Agile they expected. This article presents a model of Agile fluency that will help you achieve Agile's benefits. Fluency evolves through four distinct stages, each with its own benefits, costs of adoption, and key metrics. For over twelve years, we’ve been leading and helping teams transition to Agile. The industry has changed a lot in that time.
Throughout the next decade, Agile grew. The community grew, too. Growth hasn’t been without its problems. We’ve been helping teams transition to Agile since the beginning. The Agile Fluency™ model We’ve observed that Agile teams develop through four distinct stages of fluency. In the Agile Fluency™ model , we’re considering team fluency rather than individual or organizational fluency. Each star brings specific benefits, and each involves new adoption challenges. Agile Software Development: A People Business. Let's face it: People skills is not an area in which the software development community has traditionally excelled. The very traits that can help a developer excel at technical problem solving can often make him or her challenging to work with day to day. For a lot of ScrumMasters, this is by far the trickiest part of the role. It is also by far the most important.
A ScrumMaster who doesn't work well with people, and get them working well with each other, is a ScrumMaster who is not serving the team well. To truly master Scrum, and to realize its great benefits, you must do more than gain a detailed knowledge of the theory and best practices. You must become a master of working with people. The skills and qualities of a great ScrumMaster are too numerous to list here. Trust Without a culture of trust, there is no chance of success. All too often, developers come from a background of having been beaten up by the project manager for not delivering. Leadership Communication Teamwork Motivation. Brief History of Agile Movement | Technology Trend Analysis. Brief History of Agile Movement Posted by Udayan Banerjee on March 23, 2012 · 24 Comments In February this year agile movement completes 11 years of existence. I am sure you are either using some form of agile methodology or examining the possibility of using them.
But, are you aware of how the agile movement happened? The Influencers It is clear from the notes published by Jon Kern that 4 methodologies had significant influence on the manifesto – they are: Scrum (Jeff Sutherland and Ken Schwaber – also Mike Beedle)DSDM (DSDM Consortium represented by Arie van Bennekum)ASD (Jim Highsmith)XP (Kent Beck, Ward Cunningham and Ron Jeffries – Martin Fowler) Prior to the meet all these methodologies were classified as “Lightweight Methodologies”. 1992 – Crystal Methods 1993 – Refactoring 1994 – Dynamic Systems Development Method 1995 – Scrum and Pair Development Scrum Pair Development 1997 – Feature Driven Development 1999 – Many Things Happened Adaptive Software Development The Pragmatic Programmer. There Are 2 Kinds of Writers: Architects and Gardeners.
Designed by Dmitry Baranovskiy for the Noun Project The creative routines of famous creatives has been popular internet fodder this year. The Pacific Standard thinks this obsession and trend of emulating famous artist’s habits is problematic, to say the least. The larger picture, says Casey N. Cep, is that most artists did not always followed these routines they’re known for anyways. The idea that any one of these habits can be isolated from the entirety of the writer’s life and made into a template for the rest of us is nonsense. We often talk about process at 99U, so we think this is a great debate. Read the rest of the article here.