Is there any joy left in this industry?

[markw-FJ05HQ0HCKaWd6l5hS35sQ at public.gmane.org (Mark Woodward)]

On 10/28/2010 12:00 PM, discuss-request-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org wrote:
> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 00:42:02 -0400
> From: David Kramer<david-8uUts6sDVDvs2Lz0fTdYFQ at public.gmane.org>
> Subject: Re: Is there any joy left in this industry?
> To:discuss-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org
> Message-ID:<4CC8FF1A.7040901-8uUts6sDVDvs2Lz0fTdYFQ at public.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 10/27/2010 10:40 PM, Mark Woodward wrote:
>    
>> >  Here's my rant.
>> >  
>> >  I've been a software developer for over 25 years. When I started, it was
>> >  a cool profession. We were creative and we had options. We got paid well
>> >  and we did amazing things.
>>      
> Most things made for 25 years become commoditized as the hard problems
> get solved, eh?
>    
Perhaps, but I can't believe that there aren't any "hard problems" left. 
There are plenty, but the industry has basically decided to fight over 
commodities instead of growing the environment.
>> >  25 years later.....
>> >  The "cloud echo chamber" makes it impossible to do anything that make
>> >  sense.
>> >  
>> >  The "agile" development process is nothing more than code for
>> >  micro-management.
>>      
> Wholeheartedly differ from you here.  It's kinda the opposite of that.
> Agile done right is about self-directed teams who have a say in the
> decision-making process, shared ownership, and transparent processes.
> It's the freedom to say "No we can't cram this in this iteration unless
> you remove an equivalent number of story points, because the numbers
> need to add up based on our current velocity, but the next iteration
> starts in just two weeks, and we can plan for it then".  It's the
> freedom to say "This is going to take 5 story points, and these other
> developers agree with me, so we win Planning Poker.".
>
> It's true that there is frequent reporting, but frequent reporting !=
> micromanagement.  Frequent reporting == you can't go too far in the
> wrong direction without finding out about it, even if "the right
> direction" changes.  Less time writing code that gets thrown away
> because requirements changed.
>
> Disclaimer: I am a member of (and on the Board of)
> http://www.agilebazaar.org
>
> I will agree that a lot of very stupid things are being done in the name
> of Agile that are not Agile at all, but that's not the fault of Agile.
>    

Here's my problem with Agile, the Agile proponents claim it is a good 
system, but decry that when people do it wrong, its the people's fault 
and not "Agile."  A system or practice that depends completely on the 
the people doing it right for success isn't really a system. The fact is 
"competent" people will do a competent job, and incompetent people will 
do an incompetent job. "Agile" does nothing to improve this truism. It 
only makes the development process short sighted and puts the team on an 
endless treadmill of unobtainable "sprints."

Agile becomes a cudgel for management to have developers ALWAYS behind 
the 8-ball because things always take longer than estimates. Agile's 
time constraints forces a reduction in problem analysis which means that 
you don't really understand non-trivial problems until you are already 
late. Before you know it, you're at work at 9:00 PM working feverishly 
to complete a feature before the next day's stand up.

In several companies I have worked at or with in the last few years, I 
see the same thing. The old adage is more true under "Agile" than ever 
before: "There never time to do it right, but there's always time to do 
it again."

Then, don't get me started on CEOs and MBA types that preach "Agile" to 
"get engineering under control." Kiss that 50 hour week goodbye. You 
might as well change your designation from "human" to "veal," because 
you are sitting in a small box for the foreseeable future.

Some of the core principles of agile are, of course, hold overs from the 
old days and hacking. Iteration instead of in-depth design, favoring 
napkins over velum is better, sure, but while "agile" might have started 
as a way to improve the software development model, like "Rock & Roll" 
it has become a corporate cesspool of the worst sort of practices.

In short, if you are doing "Agile" right, it isn't because of "agile," 
it because of you and you just happen to have chosen agile. Agile in and 
of itself only makes things worse.