3 ms·
Your last paragraph makes me wonder: are there two sets of people, one of people who perform better under Agile, and one of people who don’t? We acknowledge the
by lumb63 4y ago
Your last paragraph makes me wonder: are there two sets of people, one of people who perform better under Agile, and one of people who don’t? We acknowledge the above is true for, e.g., work from home, but have many ever taken the time to consider the same might be true for development process?
I’ve worked with (and supervised) developers who I’m fine with sending off into their corner to do what they think is best for weeks at a time. I’m confident they’ll come back with something great, more often than not. I’ve also seen developers who I’m not comfortable with sending off on their own for even a day in between daily standups.
I wonder if there’s a process that allows to reap the spoils of both types of developers. Naturally, I’d rather have a team of the first type and think hiring those is the best way, but inevitably, some of the second type make their way in.
- AnimalMuppet 4y agoI wonder if the difference is not developers, but managers who can/can't do agile.
- hackerfromthefu 4y agoAnd there are also adaptable people that make it work under most or any system, and another type of people who find the failure cases for almost any type of system.
- desmosxxx 4y agoWhat this normally looks like is a project leader that syncs with each developer as needed and aggregates that into the project management overview with no/minimal large stand-ups or syncs. If two developers should adjust or be in contact than the leader facilitates that. etc. The agile framework can still be followed by the project leaders, but the developers (who don't like micromanaging) can be shielded from any rigidness.