3 ms·
> nothing to do with scrum and agile. Well, I know what you’re trying to say, and technically, you’re correct - if any shred of the agile manifesto were observ
by commandlinefan 7y ago
> nothing to do with scrum and agile.
Well, I know what you’re trying to say, and technically, you’re correct - if any shred of the agile manifesto were observed, you would be actually correct, too - but “agile as practiced by everybody who practices it” is, for all intents and purposes, “agile and scrum” now, so we may as well stop pretending it’s in any way related to what it was supposed to be. Once the phrase “agile” got some mindshare, it was bastardized and twisted into the unholy abomination that we suffer today: that is, the exact same thing that came before it. If somebody were to come along and put together a perfect, workable, realistic, livable, maintainable, achievable software development methodology - say, the “pwrlma” method - it would be twisted back into what “agile and scrum” are today by the same people who can only reason by analogy. Software will always be managed as if it were a building construction effort and programmers will always be treated as slightly more educated bricklayers.
- mcv 7y agoThat is far too defeatist for my taste, and not my experience at all. The problem is that people subject themselves to bad managers and toxic corporate culture. Then Agile comes along and throws them a lifeline, and they let the bad managers take it, instead of taking it for themselves. Real Agile is out there, and is being practices very effectively, but you've got to take it and apply it, and not let poor managers corrupt it. And there are many companies that do not have this toxic culture. Or start your own; software developers are in a better position to start their own business than most other professions.