Thread by @swardley

Fairly dated practice (i.e. common knowledge in some circles for 15 years) but still a good article by @HarvardBiz (cough, am I really saying that?) on use of Agile -

https://twitter.com/HarvardBiz/status/1452855007024492545

NB. There is a world of difference between using Agile Methods (see Map) and ...

@HarvardBiz ... "being Agile" which requires the use of appropriate methods. This was explained in Salamon and Storey's innovation paradox (2002) but still ... nice to see HBR consistently catching up.

The maps are from 2012. I could dig up earlier ones but, I like these.

It is really important to understand that as things evolve their characteristics change and how you manage them also has to change ...

... however, without a map to help guide you on where to use them then that knowledge is about as useful as a fart in a spacesuit.

Funny eh, in my world this was well understand circa 2006. It's 2021 and people are still discussing it.

Anyways, don't mix up "Using Agile"
(as in an agile method such as XP) with "Being Agile" (as in speed and responsiveness of organisation which requires appropriate methods applied to the context).

X : Is use of appropriate methods enough to be Agile?
Me : It's a start. The maps give you a focus on user, user needs, understanding the details (the chain), understanding what is being considered (i.e. how evolved the components are), using appropriate methods etc ... BUT ...

... it's the beginning of your journey. If you really want to be an agile organisation then there are a lot of principles you need to implement. Here's a handy list - the doctrine table (a collection of universally useful principles).

X : There's a difference between "Agile the method" and "Being agile as an organisation"
Me : Yep. Always has been. "Using" is not the same as "Being" because of context. If you're looking for a simple one size fits all method then that's probably not what you want to hear ...

... but life isn't one size fits all and simple. Things evolve, characteristics change. You can't avoid it.

It's also not only things that evolve but methods do as well ...

which is why we end up with different evolving competencies each specialising in one material instance of the same evolving thing.

Again, if you don't map, then you have almost no hope of getting this right.

X : Why no hope without a map?
Me : It's just a simple case of permutations. Take a systems graph (not a map) and try to apply "appropriate methods" ... the combinations can be vast i.e. 300M+. Chances are you will get it very wrong (and that's what I see regularly) ...

... it only gets worse when people try and break things it into "contracts", grouping by things that sound familiar. Most contracts I see are doomed to failure before they've even been signed.
X : How can you tell?
Me : Well ...

Me : ... take the contract, overlay it on the map. I can tell you that the "engineering" contract above will cause massive cost overruns before you've even started.
X : Does anyone do this?
Me : Some people do ...

... and they save hundreds of millions if not billions.

Gosh, we do need @liammax back in the UK Gov.

X : I thought you didn't like this Government?
Me : I don't like this Government. I don't trust Boris. I think some of them are dogmatic jerks and don't know what they are doing. But I want them to succeed. They are my Government after all. Nation first, party second ... always.

X : Always?
Me : Yes. Our society first (represented by our nation) and that means the collective values of the society not of any one party.