5 ms·

This is why I don't believe SCRUM is meaningfully agile at all, and only exists so that companies can signal agility and management consultancies can sell agili

This is why I don't believe SCRUM is meaningfully agile at all, and only exists so that companies can signal agility and management consultancies can sell agility. When agile development is fundamentally about fast feedback loops and not letting bureaucracy get in the way of delivering, a process laden model like SCRUM cannot be said to meet that definition.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
clairity 5y ago
> "SCRUM... only exists so that companies can signal agility and management consultancies can sell agility." many companies employ scrum that way, but it's not instrinsic to scrum. it really depends on where the locus of control is. if it's firmly outside the team, it doesn't matter which methodology you use, you're looked at as cogs in the machine, as order takers. the locus needs to be in, or at the very least, right next to, the team for any kind of agile development to work. it's usually top-down hierarchy that causes that kind of friction and expectation mismatch.
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  But if the team has the impetus to change the processes, they can get rid of the SCRUM rituals that don't work for them. Given that it comes with quite a few, bottom up SCRUM will inevitably change into an actual agile system suited to the team. I've never worked in a team (or run a team) where SCRUM was kept wholesale by the team or anything other than SCRUM sprints were chosen by management.
pydry 5y ago
Nothing is really meaningfully agile because "agile" isnt really a meaningful thing. It's something everyone projects their desires onto. Fast feedback loops were never part of the core stated values.
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  That's just not true. See here: https://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html https://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html All of these statements are about optimising the development feedback loop: > early and continuous delivery of valuable software. > Welcome changing requirements, even late in > Agile processes harness change for the customer's competitive advantage. > Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale. > The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation. > At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly.
  - pydry 5y ago
    Feedback isnt mentioned. Loops arent mentioned. I do appreciate that your interpretation is one possible interpretation of the above but it isnt the only one. You can also interpret it as develop as fast as possible, avoiding any kind of development guardrails, keeping no docs and being ok with 150 page requirements word documents that will become outdated tomorrow. I wish this were me being disingenuous in interpretation but IME it's not all that uncommon.
    - beaconstudios 5y ago
      rapid responsive change to changing requirements implicitly requires a tight feedback loop.
      - pydry 5y ago
        Sustainably, yes. Ive seen it mean cut corners and a rapid build up in technical debt just as if not more often. The agile principles now stick in my craw as a result. I kind of wish agile DID emphasize feedback loops but it doesnt. A set of principles that waggle their eyes and hints suggestively at feedback loops isnt good enough IMHO.
        5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

clairity 5y ago

> "SCRUM... only exists so that companies can signal agility and management consultancies can sell agility." many companies employ scrum that way, but it's not instrinsic to scrum. it really depends on where the locus of control is. if it's firmly outside the team, it doesn't matter which methodology you use, you're looked at as cogs in the machine, as order takers. the locus needs to be in, or at the very least, right next to, the team for any kind of agile development to work. it's usually top-down hierarchy that causes that kind of friction and expectation mismatch.

beaconstudios 5y ago
But if the team has the impetus to change the processes, they can get rid of the SCRUM rituals that don't work for them. Given that it comes with quite a few, bottom up SCRUM will inevitably change into an actual agile system suited to the team. I've never worked in a team (or run a team) where SCRUM was kept wholesale by the team or anything other than SCRUM sprints were chosen by management.

pydry 5y ago

Nothing is really meaningfully agile because "agile" isnt really a meaningful thing. It's something everyone projects their desires onto. Fast feedback loops were never part of the core stated values.

beaconstudios 5y ago
That's just not true. See here: https://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html https://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html All of these statements are about optimising the development feedback loop: > early and continuous delivery of valuable software. > Welcome changing requirements, even late in > Agile processes harness change for the customer's competitive advantage. > Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale. > The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation. > At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly.
- pydry 5y ago
  Feedback isnt mentioned. Loops arent mentioned. I do appreciate that your interpretation is one possible interpretation of the above but it isnt the only one. You can also interpret it as develop as fast as possible, avoiding any kind of development guardrails, keeping no docs and being ok with 150 page requirements word documents that will become outdated tomorrow. I wish this were me being disingenuous in interpretation but IME it's not all that uncommon.
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    rapid responsive change to changing requirements implicitly requires a tight feedback loop.
    - pydry 5y ago
      Sustainably, yes. Ive seen it mean cut corners and a rapid build up in technical debt just as if not more often. The agile principles now stick in my craw as a result. I kind of wish agile DID emphasize feedback loops but it doesnt. A set of principles that waggle their eyes and hints suggestively at feedback loops isnt good enough IMHO.
      - 5y ago