Less is more agile
beny23.github.io
Less is more agile
1–10 of 174 posts
Re: Less is more agile
#2> Allen described his work as a consultant when he goes into a new organisation:
> - First he observes
> - Then he would try to identify the biggest problem
> - Then he would try change it (i.e. run an experiment)
> - Then if that works, run another experiment
> - If it doesn’t work, go back
It's probably no accident, but this is pretty close to the scientific method.
Re: Less is more agile
#3> Compared to waterfall, it is fundamentally less constrained. Waterfall demands that we know the system and all the possible problems upfront
How I know you don't know what you're talking about in 2 dozen words or less.
Re: Less is more agile
#4> Compared to waterfall, it is fundamentally less constrained. Waterfall demands that we know the system and all the possible problems upfront How I know you don't know what you're talking about in 2 dozen words or less.
Could you elaborate?
Re: Less is more agile
#5Related: The Land that Scrum Forgot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG4LH6P8Syk#t=5m37s
Re: Less is more agile
#6> Compared to waterfall, it is fundamentally less constrained. Waterfall demands that we know the system and all the possible problems upfront How I know you don't know what you're talking about in 2 dozen words or less.
Could you elaborate?
Waterfall is not practiced, its an ill-defined strawman meant to be the "other wrong way of doing things". At best its a self-deprecating measure meaning the more agile you are, the less you know where you are going, and the more waterfall your project management appears the more you know what you are doing. Is that supposed to sell me on agile? I want the strawman.
Re: Less is more agile
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you elaborate?
Waterfall is not practiced, its an ill-defined strawman meant to be the "other wrong way of doing things". At best its a self-deprecating measure meaning the more agile you are, the less you know where you are going, and the more waterfall your project management appears the more you know what you are doing. Is that supposed to sell me on agile? I want the strawman.
Waterfall absolutely was practiced. Budgets always overrun and developers had to work overtime to meet deadlines completing all the tasks that weren't mentioned in the plan.
Re: Less is more agile
#8> Recruiting people does not work by doing laundry lists of questions asked by HR drones that don’t understand context or demand 10 years of experience in a technology that’s 8 years old. Five rounds of interviews, tests and exams where people have to recite algorithms by heart are pretty pointless.
I second that sentiment.
I've worked in places small and autonomous enough that the office manager would handle the admin of posting a job ad, passing on the CVs to the person who knew what their team was looking for in a colleague - note, a colleague, not a "new hire". The absence of an HR filtering layer left hiring decisions to those it most directly affected, but with the admin side handled by office managers (or in some cases COOs).
I've also worked in far larger places with heavyweight HR departments. Frustrating and backed by corporate policy (and as declared to shareholders) regarding recruitment processes. The question "Why can’t hiring be agile?" is worth exploring, I think.
Re: Less is more agile
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you elaborate?
Waterfall is not practiced, its an ill-defined strawman meant to be the "other wrong way of doing things". At best its a self-deprecating measure meaning the more agile you are, the less you know where you are going, and the more waterfall your project management appears the more you know what you are doing. Is that supposed to sell me on agile? I want the strawman.
> Waterfall is not practiced
Is this anecdotal or what? "I want the citations."
Re: Less is more agile
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Waterfall is not practiced, its an ill-defined strawman meant to be the "other wrong way of doing things". At best its a self-deprecating measure meaning the more agile you are, the less you know where you are going, and the more waterfall your project management appears the more you know what you are doing. Is that supposed to sell me on agile? I want the strawman.
Waterfall absolutely was practiced. Budgets always overrun and developers had to work overtime to meet deadlines completing all the tasks that weren't mentioned in the plan.
This still happens under agile too. It’s not like a process magically fixes things. Most of the issues I read from SWE in regards to agile is that they are often neglected in both decision making and the ability to hold leadership accountable.
No amount of agileness is going to save you from a miss managed team.