2 ms·
> "Agile" is not a methodology that you can adopt. It simply does not exist. Tell that to 99% of the people I've seen who are convinced they "do Agile". What
by Florin_Andrei 11y ago
> "Agile" is not a methodology that you can adopt. It simply does not exist.
Tell that to 99% of the people I've seen who are convinced they "do Agile".
What they do is micromanagement, and call it something fancy.
- derefr 11y agoI don't know why, but that line made something click for me, about what the intent of "Agile" is/was. Agile, from what I can tell, is supposed to be a way to get out from under micromanagement—by effectively creating a contractual interface and protocol for the interactions between the development team and the "stakeholders" (i.e. anyone who could change the business's direction—clients, yes, but also PMs, managers, whomever). The core of Agile is that developers get to not talk to any stakeholders for a whole two weeks at a time (a "sprint"), and just code. Not heads-down-black-hole coding, but rather collaborative just-us-developers-in-a-room-together coding. The entire rest of Agile, other than that core, is a process for making sure that the project doesn't swerve out in some stupid direction due to the developers being incommunicado with the stakeholders. User-stories and TDD, client representatives, Scrum, etc. are all just to let a bunch of programmers—without any managers—achieve a peerwise consensus of what they should be working on. Said that way, it's very likely that it's literally impossible for most corporations to "do Agile" given policies about how management is to be done.