Skip to main content

Be or Be Not; there is no Do in Agile

Why do we practice this thing we call Agile?  Is it for the results it provides? 

I've been working with companies and people that use the "A" word in many different ways.  Sometime the word is used as if it were a method of working.
"We are doing Agile on this project, but the team has 34% story carry over each iteration."
Sometimes it is used as a bludgeon to beat someone not behaving as one would like them to behave.
Sales:  "I'd like you to work on this severity one bug, it just came in and the customer while not really blocked is considering a purchase of our SuperWidget and if you just sneak this in today they will be really happy."  
Team Member:  "Sorry, talk to the PO we have sprint commitments." 
Sales:  "Well, that's not very Agile!"  
While at other times it is a promised land, a utopia of project management where we all live in harmony.  Many times it is used as a technique to achieve some other purpose, a differentiator that will achieve some other objective.  Objectives such as speed to market, doubling revenue in five years, raising quality while lowering cost, there are many other business objectives for "installing the agile".

I am not surprise when department managers say their groups are doing Agile.  I typically bit my tongue and run through this test in my head.

  • Show me your teams interacting with each other, the customers, and product owner more than they are working with the tools, process, etc.  
  • Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
  • Great you must have working software, show me your last iteration demo on the staging server, now.  
  • Working software over comprehensive documentation
  • Which one of these people is the customer?  
  • Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
  • What feed back did the customer give in the last month or two that cause you to deliver higher value than initially planned?  
  • Responding to change over following a plan

Is there just one process way to do these things?  No.  There are thousands of ways to do these things.

Those things are the definition of Agile.  Agile is not a method, it is a way of being.  It is a synergy of many things we do, and many things we do not do.  It is in the decision we make and it is mostly in the underlying reasons - why - we make those decisions.

One could do Scrum or XP, those are processes (or frameworks or techniques) - but one cannot do Agile.  However, one could be Agile.  Agility is a path, either you are on it, or off it - there is no Agile destination.


Yoda teaching young Skywalker "Do or do not, there is no try."

But why should one attempt to be Agile?  Answering this question is getting to the core purpose.  It is not about all the outcomes that might result in a group or organization being Agile.  If being Agile is the goal, then we are surely going to disappoint someone.  Perhaps ourselves, perhaps our customers. Customers don't want us to responded to their change request - they want products that met their discovered needs (true needs) with the ability to sustain the continual deliver of meeting their needs in the future.

Simon Sinek TED Talk: How great leaders inspire action

I think we must be Agile for our selves.  Then align our values of being Agile within the context of the purpose of the organization we choose to work with.  If this alignment is too difficult, the friction too high, options exist.  Explore those options.

An agile enterprise is one that has achieved a level of operational excellence that enables it to make changes at the same pace that it discovers a need for them. -- Tim Snyder

Tim explains with great clarity why Agile is a proper goal for an organization (not all companies - but some).  Agile is a slightly unique type of goal - a system-optimizing goal.



2 comments

Most Popular on Agile Complexification Inverter

David's notes on "Drive"

- "The Surprising Truth about what Motivates Us" by Dan Pink.

Amazon book order
What I notice first and really like is the subtle implication in the shadow of the "i" in Drive is a person taking one step in a running motion.  This brings to mind the old saying - "there is no I in TEAM".  There is however a ME in TEAM, and there is an I in DRIVE.  And when one talks about motivating a team or an individual - it all starts with - what's in it for me.

Introduction

Pink starts with an early experiment with monkeys on problem solving.  Seems the monkeys were much better problem solver's than the scientist thought they should be.  This 1949 experiment is explained as the early understanding of motivation.  At the time there were two main drivers of motivation:  biological & external influences.  Harry F. Harlow defines the third drive in a novel theory:  "The performance of the task provided intrinsic reward" (p 3).  This is Dan Pink's M…

Software Development terms applied to Home Construction

Let's Invert the typically wrong headed view of Software Development project management as a construction project.  We can map it the other way just to see if it works... to have some fun, to explore the meaning of phrases we toss around quite frequently.


Normally Project Management terms come from a construction domain.  We are going to apply the lexicon of modern software to the construction of a home.  We will follow the construction project and meet some of the people doing the work.

This is a very small (8 homes from $600,000 skyward) program in my 30-40 year old neighborhood.

About 6 months ago I saw the programs landing page go up.  It gives casual observers and some of the stakeholders a general idea of the intent of the program.  And most importantly who to contact for additional information if you happen to be interested in their products.

The Refuge program has 8 product projects and has them running independently.  Yet much of their DevOps infrastructure has already b…

Where is Shakespeare When We Need Him?

We are desperately searching for a term for people that connotes the best of human kind.  The creative, sensing, combinatorial synergistic, empathic solutioning persons that have yet to been labeled with a role name that works.

Some of the old terms:
Staff, Workforce, Human Resource, My Team, Army, Company

Shakespeare created 1700 words in his time.  He mutated verbs to nouns, and vice-a-versa, transformed verbs into adjectives, and formed words from whole cloth never before heard.  This skill is rare, but there is a poet that can create the term we need in the twenty-first century.

What should this term define?

21st Century Human Resource; the generalizing specialist.

Yes, but what more?  What less?

Suggest your poetry in the comments, let us see if we cannot do 1/1700 as well as The Bard.

By-the-way; who create the phrase "coin a word"?




a little feedback please...

some feedback please...
How do you like the new look and feel of our site?
  ___)  nah (I like the old one better - bring it back)
  _X_)  yeah (much cleaner and easy to navigate)



powered by Typeform
See Also:

Innovation in the Automobile Industry

In the 1900s the automobile industry was the most important and innovation industry in the USA.  But one could question if this was good for our society in the long run.  And one could question if they actually innovated.

In the early 1900s there were few automobiles, very little infrastructure created to support the industry.  For example the road system was still designed for horse drawn wagons and the wagon wheel (remember a steal rim and wooden compression spoke wheel).  The future US Highways, or the 1950s Interstate Highway System at the cost of $425 billion were decades and many innovations away. There was no gas service station, there were however horse stables, farriers, and blacksmiths in each town along the roads.  There was no real "road map", there was no road naming system, like was created in 1926 - the United States Numbered Highway System.

The industry employees millions of people, and was a large factor in the economy of the USA.  It created or was created b…