![]() |
Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On 07/14/2012 02:27 PM, Mark Woodward wrote: > We sort of had a little dust-up about agile programming techniques. > Ruffled feathers and I hope no hurt feelings. Hop on over to Slashdot > http://developers.slashdot.org/story/12/07/14/1242237/new-analyst-report-calls-agile-a-scam-says-its-an-easy-out-for-lazy-devs Fully agree. I've read several articles talking about Voke's missives on Agile Software development. As noted in the comments, Voke seems to be just two ex-Gartner people trying to drum up eyeballs. Even if you don't like Agile, you have to agree that they don't make sense. For instance, they have one report called "The Agile Dilemma", which pretty much boils down to "Agile doesn't work because it's not the silver bullet that Managers think it is, and they don't understand it". http://voke.blogspot.com/2012/07/agile-dilemma-who-doesnt-want-to-be.html Dunno how that translates into Agile itself being a scam, however: - There is definitely a large contingent of consultants and coaches who are using the "Agile" name to generate lots of money without delivering the benefits of "Agile". Some of them are doing it on purpose, and others just don't grok Agile as well as they think they do, and are too inexperienced to know better. At the last Agile New England meeting, the presenter made a very snide remark about Scrum Master certification. Something like "you take a two week class and pay $1000 to take a test, then you get to have 'Master' in your job title?" Stupid Managers and Directors and CXO's are always looking for a silver bullet. This ain't it. Neither is anything else. Until someone invents a perpetual motion machine, a time machine, or a stargate portal, it ain't gonna exist. But Consultants are happy to sell you one. What they're pushing is neither a silver bullet or real Agile. - Agile is not right for every environment. It takes a cooperative relationship between the development team and the rest of the company, works best in changing environments (either internal changes or external changes), and requires you to not lie to each other. Not every company fits that profile. - Agile is not revolutionary. Agile did not invent anything new. Agile is a collection of existing goals, practices, and values that happen to work very well together when done right - Agile's publicized successful project rate (which is a highly subjective measure) is actually quite low. Last number I saw was something like 15% success rate. I feel strongly that much of this is due to people saying they're doing Agile when they're not. I have seen a fairly strong correlation between actually following Agile for real in the right kind of environment and project success, and a fairly strong correlation between fooling yourself into thinking you're doing Agile when your not, and project failure (often more spectacularly than if they just stuck with Waterfall).
![]() |
|
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |