Agile Is for Losers (2020)
hypermatic.com
Agile Is for Losers (2020)
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#2> "This project was a fixed cost, fixed scope with a fixed deadline - if we didn't launch this new site in 4 months, the current live site was going to be taken offline by the previous agency, due to their contract and hosting ending."
Author mentions this, but there is really no point to use agile methods for such a project. Agile is not for task tracking.
With that said, if the project has uncertainty about what's wanted, UX is still researching or whatever, I'd still probably have dev-driven increments and demos to pin people down on making decisions. No external mgmt running that though.
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#3For me, Agile is a good idea implemented badly and subverted by the "business people" to hell and back.
Without going into details, I find its core methodology cool.
- You meet with the client, get an overview of the project
- Cobble together something in the given time
- Show the product-in-development, get the feedback from the client
- Rinse repeat until the product and the client needs are aligned
But from my experience the real-world implementation is meetings. More and more meetings. After a while client loses interest and basically leaves you to do something, which diverges from the real world need and solves an imaginary problem.
This happened so much that, I find my gorge rising whenever someone says "Oh we are using agile methodology"
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#4> bastardizing Agile
Sensationalist headline followed by lots of examples of people doing Agile incorrectly and the author seemingly being surprised by the outcome and blaming Agile.
Garbage in, garbage out applies to all sorts of things, and processes and frameworks are certainly in that set. If you willfully ignore the principles of Agile and do "waterfall in sprints" don't be surprised when it ends up being a mess.
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#5Whenever I read about why Agile is bad and then the inevitable comments about how "no, Agile is good, it's just [company/business people/project managers/etc.] implemented it wrong," I'm struck with the similarity of "no, Communism isn't bad it's just that no one has really done it yet."
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#6For me, Agile is a good idea implemented badly and subverted by the "business people" to hell and back. Without going into details, I find its core methodology cool. - You meet with the client, get an overview of the project - Cobble together something in the given time - Show the product-in-development, get the feedback from the client - Rinse repeat until the product and the client needs are aligned But from my exp…
I’m at a place that’s implementing it backwards: “let’s train everyone doing the actual work on all the ceremonies and how to waste a bunch of time dicking around in issue trackers… wait you’re missing every sprint goal badly, why? We better figure that out!”
We could have told you why before any of this: tasks get dropped on us and we’re told to work on them without yet having the necessary access, context, a firm explanation of what actually needs to be done, often no idea who it’s for or who knows can answer the questions we have, et c. So we lose 1-2 two-week sprints figuring out a bunch of crap that the right people could have put together in a day or three, then get to actually start the development work. Getting that right should be table stakes before starting with all the ceremonies and shit.
Fixing that is everything and doesn’t require “agile”. Do that and everything will work great. Agile will get the credit if we do ever fix that, but has nothing to do with it.
[edit] oh and of course they’re paying external agile consultants for all this, further increasing waste.
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#7> "This project was a fixed cost, fixed scope with a fixed deadline - if we didn't launch this new site in 4 months, the current live site was going to be taken offline by the previous agency, due to their contract and hosting ending." Author mentions this, but there is really no point to use agile methods for such a project. Agile is not for task tracking. With that said, if the project has uncertainty about what's…
This is probably the most damning thing about capital-A Agile. If you try to talk to a certified Agile practitioner about what kinds of projects aren't appropriate for an Agile process, you might get dismissiveness, you might get hostility, but you'll never get a frank and engaged conversation.
Heck, if you ask an Agile coach when another agile methodology like Kanban or Shape Up! or Lean-CMMI might be preferable to Scrum, they'll act like a Free Evangelist preacher who just heard a member of their congregation say something nice about Methodists.
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#8Whenever I read about why Agile is bad and then the inevitable comments about how "no, Agile is good, it's just [company/business people/project managers/etc.] implemented it wrong," I'm struck with the similarity of "no, Communism isn't bad it's just that no one has really done it yet."
I've worked for several different companies and several different teams since "Agile" was developed. What I can say is "Agile" doesn't exist: I haven't even seen two teams within the same company doing Agile the same way and referring to the same thing when they say they're doing "Agile."
All "Agile" means at this time is you're not likely to be doing Waterfall, though I'm an old fart and remember Waterfall and I can tell you there are teams saying they're "Agile" and they're actually doing Waterfall. "Agile" is a meaningless word.
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#9> "This project was a fixed cost, fixed scope with a fixed deadline - if we didn't launch this new site in 4 months, the current live site was going to be taken offline by the previous agency, due to their contract and hosting ending." Author mentions this, but there is really no point to use agile methods for such a project. Agile is not for task tracking. With that said, if the project has uncertainty about what's…
Very true, but the agency does benefit from the current state of affairs: You can load up an engagement with more people...whom are there to help facilitate the process. These people add to the bottom line engagement revenue. When all your competitors are doing the same then the buyers of your services have no choice but to pony up. As someone who builds and enjoys building, it saddens me. We can do better, but how do we convince the deciders of this?
We're busy building when others are busy convincing the deciders they need Agile Scrum or Lean Agile or whatever flavor is cool in . It's like Baskin Robbins - 31 flavors and each will make you fat and sick with enough exposure!
Re: Agile Is for Losers (2020)
#10Whenever I read about why Agile is bad and then the inevitable comments about how "no, Agile is good, it's just [company/business people/project managers/etc.] implemented it wrong," I'm struck with the similarity of "no, Communism isn't bad it's just that no one has really done it yet."
And it fails for pretty much the same reason Marx's ideas failed: it may sound like a harmonious utopia on paper, but in practice the whole thing is inherently brittle and unstable and immediately collapses into a maximally malevolent perversion of itself upon contact with humans' tendency to behave like humans, like the sociological equivalent of a prion disease.