4 ms·

I think agile has always suggested modifying to fit the team - so then do we need an agile light, or just critical thinkers doing whatever agile provides actual

• volfied 8y ago
  And the industry pretty much modified agile in a way that gets the most work out of people, regardless of fit. So yeah, sometimes we do need something that's written as a "manifesto" to remind people what agile actually was supposed to be.
• hvidgaard 8y ago
  The core DNA of agile was always adaption. But when your adaption consists of using your existing methodology with some agile concepts, but no retrospect on the methodology itself, you're not agile by definition. What this "Agile Lite" puts right in the center is to split up your goals such that you can make meaningful work in a 3 week window, and track it asynchronously. Managers are free to have an overall plan for release in 12 months, as long as it's split up into units of work at most 1 day long. What I think I read from your comment is that if you couldn't get this to work in the "Old" agile, you will fail with this as well, and I agree.
• chris11 8y ago
  Personally I think that asking how teams do agile differently and how team members change agile practices can be a good gut check to see what agile is like at a company. If some teams do scrum and some do kanban or some teams have daily standups and others don't, then agile is probably more developer driven. But if the answer is something small, like the time of the daily scrum then agile's probably management driven.