,
9 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
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.
1/9
1/9
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:
2/9
2/9
"The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams."
This principle makes it clear that everything, software, architecture, design ... AND REQUIREMENTS ... comes from within the team. EMERGES from within the team.
3/9
This principle makes it clear that everything, software, architecture, design ... AND REQUIREMENTS ... comes from within the team. EMERGES from within the team.
3/9
For example, requirements DO NOT come from some business entity, get passed up to a central committee, and then passed down some conventional management or project management hierarchy until it lands on some programmer's desk.
4/9
4/9
This is not "anti" management. It doesn't at all address topics like budgeting efforts, compensating people, assessing performance, or many other "management" concerns.
Rather, it proposes a new and different form of management of the production of software products.
5/9
Rather, it proposes a new and different form of management of the production of software products.
5/9
It specifically addresses a new way that software development should be managed, with self-organization and incremental, evolutionary techniques based on the sustainable production of working software.
6/9
6/9
Is Agile anti-management? I don't think so. It is definitely anti-tayloristic management, and rather pro-deming management.
And, like all good people, we're in favor of good productive management and strongly opposed to poor, ineffective, harmful management.
7/9
And, like all good people, we're in favor of good productive management and strongly opposed to poor, ineffective, harmful management.
7/9
But I want to suggest that the bottom line is this:
If an organization is trying to "manage" Agile Software Development by providing any form of conventional management control over the team's choice of what do to and how to do it, odds are they're doing it wrong.
8/9
If an organization is trying to "manage" Agile Software Development by providing any form of conventional management control over the team's choice of what do to and how to do it, odds are they're doing it wrong.
8/9
And if you're an Agile proponent and you're trying to reach some kind of middle ground or rapprochement with conventional management, odds are that you, too, don't really understand how radical Agile Software Development is intended to be.
9/9
9/9
