3 ms·
When a group of people pick a manifesto and are empowered to work towards improving their own working conditions, it's great. My comment has the flavour of a,
by agentultra 3y ago
When a group of people pick a manifesto and are empowered to work towards improving their own working conditions, it's great.
My comment has the flavour of a, "no true scotsman," situation but it's not necessarily, in my view, a matter of calling a spade a spade.
The problem is that the spirit of the manifesto is a socialist one which runs counter to how capital runs businesses. The manifesto says "we," meaning the developers doing the work, should prefer customer collaboration over negotiating contracts. However most developers in most companies do not have the power to enforce this preference. The executives, founders, and managers sign the contracts. The developers are hired to write the software. There is no negotiation: your team doesn't meet their deadlines people will start getting fired or the business will go under.
"Business people and developers must work together daily," they sure do. Every stand up, every morning, to tell the manager/lead what you did yesterday, what you got stuck on, what you're going to do today. "But that's not how it should be," well... again, what should it be? The manifesto isn't prescriptive about this. Agile-as-practiced is what we observe teams and companies doing out there. This is often how it's done.
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools? What part of agile-as-practiced isn't about processes and tools? Capitalists love processes and tools ever since they brought their own clocks and bells into their factories and started docking people's wages when they didn't show up for work on time. Planning poker, retrospective meetings, kanban boards... all processes and tools.
No businesses I've heard about or worked at have enabled developers to self-organize. This, again, would be anathema to how capitalists expect to run businesses.
The other problem with the manifesto is that it's starting to show it's age. "The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation," is a good way to ensure that your later maintainers have no idea how the software works anymore... and hasn't been true for decades: most of Linux and much OSS is developed by remote teams who've never met face to face. Writing is generally considered the best way to pass on information and it has been quite effective for a good portion of human civilization.
- Arch-TK 3y agoI don't think this has anything to do with capitalism. We have carpenters under capitalism and the companies hiring them don't force them into stand-ups every morning with some guy who has never nailed two pieces of wood together who insists on following a rigid process of chopping up the work of framing a house into sprints, user stories and story points. I actually don't work as a programmer anymore (instead as a security consultant) and suffer no micromanagement (in fact, almost no management at all). I think this is just a unique nonsense which has developed around the practice of programming. Genuinely whether I am working on a project individually or as a team, myself and my teammates get complete freedom of how we go about doing our work as long as we uphold certain standards and produce certain deliverables. This definitely seems possible in the world of software development.