Thread by @saeedwkhan

Probably the MOST abused and thus harmful principle of the #Agile Manifesto is:

"Responding to change over following a plan"

Here's a thread 🧵on how to think about it in logical and rational way, that hopeful removes whatever confusion people have.

#product #prodmgmt

1/n

Each of the 4 main statements of Manifesto are structured as

<a> over <b>

e.g.

Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Meaning that while both may be necessary, focus MORE on the left i.e. <a>, and LESS on the right i.e. <b>

2/n

But as is often the case, people misunderstand, misconstrue or corrupt simple statements and often these are interpreted as:

<a> NOT <b>

e.g.

Responding to change and NOT following a plan

It's strange, but not unexpected that this happens, albeit rather selectively.

3/n

For example, NO ONE that I know, has ever misinterpreted:

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools

as

Individuals and interactions and NOT processes and tools

Funny how that is. 🤔

But I digress

4/n

So getting back to the change vs. plan discussion.

The misinterpretation of:

"Responding to change over following a plan"

has led to a lot bizarre thinking IMHO such as the #NoRoadmaps folks.

Because in their view, a roadmap is a plan.

A roadmap is NOT a plan BTW.

5/n

Going back to the Manifesto, what the signatories were trying to promote was a move away from more traditional Waterfall type processes.

i.e. creating a big plan and then RIGIDLY sticking to that plan. And having complex change management processes layered on top.

6/n

They weren't saying don't have a plan. You always have a plan.

When building software, you have a goal or set of goals. i.e. what you ultimately want to deliver. You have some path you expect to take. That's a plan.

That is as true today as it was 20+ years ago.

7/n

The difference is that they wanted people to remove the rigidity in the way people looked at that plan.

Be open to change. Adapt when new info comes in and new things are learned.

And get rid of those heavyweight change management processes.

8/n

So if I were to make one change to that principle, it would be this:

"Responding to change over RIGIDLY following a plan"

This doesn't mean there's no plan. There is one.

It does mean that you follow it as long as it makes sense and change when info tells you otherwise.

9/n

I know a lot of this is pretty obvious and you may be wondering why I felt I had to write this.

The reason is that I still encounter groups on both sides of the spectrum.

i.e. "the plan is the plan" folks, but more commonly, "there can be no plan, we're Agile" folks.

10/n

I'm surprised that after 20 years, we're still having to discuss this, but that's where we are.

Hopefully this was helpful. If so, let me know. If not, also let me know. Would love to hear from you either way.

/end