You Call This Agile?

JoelonSoftware's most recent piece is about some of the fallacies in "Agile" software and some of the issues within it. We use Agile in some parts of the company, and have had success with that -- that said, there's always the peril that happens when development and other parts of the company have...miscommunication, which sounds like the problem described in Joel's piece.

Comments

fallacies don't exist within methodologies

[yagu]

I think one of the blessings and curses of methodologies, in this article's instance, "Agile" (ha!), is they are their own universe. So, unless there is something within the methodology that is self-contradictory methodologies don't have fallacies. Methodologies are theses, usually tepid ones at best.

Methodologies are someone's or some group's or some company's idea of a way to successfully accomplish a task, project, etc. Fortunately for all who sell these (vapor)wares, methodologies never fail, they merely suffer from those who have improperly used them.

Methodologies then become the convenient whipping boy for work not done satisfactorily. Sigh.

Peel away the layers, eventually it all still boils down to knowing what you want to do, knowing how to do it, and doing it with a strong instinct for balancing things that matter and things that don't. Methodologies won't do that for you, good project managers will.

(Some of the very best and most successful projects I worked on were with a friend who I consider to this day to be one of the best project managers I ever knew (and I knew many). He used no methodology, but had incredible instincts and a strong will. He knew how to handle time frames, important (and not-so-important) crises, difficult workers, and how to prioritize. It's a shame he didn't get better recognition - he might have had he "used a methodology". I found it ironic he was ostracized/admonished by the company, but he continued to be their go-to guy for the important work.

Bottom line, "Agile" isn't. But "Agile" is just one of a long list of bit players for methodologies in IT.

Re:fallacies don't exist within methodologies

[RingDev]

No offence meant to your friend, there are many people who have a knack for project management, but... Methodologies are kind of like stories. There are only a handful of distinct stories to have ever existed, every other story in existence is merely a slight modification or attempt at recreation of one of those original stories. While your friend may not have researched and followed any specific methodology, he likely practiced one with out even knowing it.

In defense of "Agile", it can be (agile). But it takes the right mindset from the developers, project manager, upper management and customers. Agile will not succeed in environments where anyone in that chain does not have the "Agile" mindset.

-Rick

The real advantage to Agile...

[FortKnox]

... isn't the whole issue with interuptions. That can be handled differently depending on the work (if you are making life-saving heart monitor software, you had better fix a bug the moment it comes up... if you are making some tool that other developers use once a week, a bug isn't that big of a deal)
The real advantage is illustrated in the age old swing cartoon. By using scrumm and delivering sprint demos often to the user, they can see how their money is being spent, and can present requirement changes to the user faster, thus eliminating the need to make resounding changes right away... Agile development anticipates requirement changes, instead of ignoring it like past methodologies. Is it the best? Probably not... is it a step in the right direction? You bet your ass...