3 ms·

Yeah, I agree on pretty much all of that. My point was actually a much smaller one, about just part of it: > It's not so much Basecamp, but Agile mixed with Sc

Yeah, I agree on pretty much all of that. My point was actually a much smaller one, about just part of it: > It's not so much Basecamp, but Agile mixed with Scrum and then enforced very strictly that's the issue. Namely, how the scrumsters and other hucksters have taken this "agile mixed with Scrum" and called that Agile-with-a-capital-A. Or, as you seem to be saying, taken Agile-with-a-capital-A and mixed it up with their own shit and saying that that's The Real Thing[TM]. Is there even such a thing as Agile-with-a-capital-A? I wonder, kind of doubt it... The whole idea seems about contemporaneous with the beginnings of the corruption of the original concept, so I suspect it's theirs. Either way: Don't let them get away with it! Don't even talk about "Agile", with a capital A, because that implies there is a hard-and-fast definition for someone to usurp. And if people think there is such a thing, some such huckster will inevitably usurp it.

solardev 2y ago
I think that battle is lost, unfortunately :( In every single team I've ever been a part of, Agile is used exclusively in the Scrumfall sense (I didn't come up with that second term either; it's just what the post-Agile blogosphere calls it). When I point out that, done this way, it goes against the entire philosophy of the original Agile Manifesto... I just get shrugs. People don't care what it used to mean; when they say it now, they mean the points and ceremonies and masters and the whole ugly shebang. It's not a battle I have the energy to fight. When a workflow isn't like that, but is just lean & simple on its own, they don't go out of their way to call it Agile or agile, uppercase or lowercase. It's just "a simple workflow" or something like that, or else some explicit other workflow (like Shape Up). I think a lot of folks have been burnt out by Scrumfall and try to practice alternatives. I've made a point to start asking potential employers how they handle project management. If they say Agile of any sort, I'll assume the worst and just walk away...

solardev 2y ago

I think that battle is lost, unfortunately :( In every single team I've ever been a part of, Agile is used exclusively in the Scrumfall sense (I didn't come up with that second term either; it's just what the post-Agile blogosphere calls it). When I point out that, done this way, it goes against the entire philosophy of the original Agile Manifesto... I just get shrugs. People don't care what it used to mean; when they say it now, they mean the points and ceremonies and masters and the whole ugly shebang. It's not a battle I have the energy to fight. When a workflow isn't like that, but is just lean & simple on its own, they don't go out of their way to call it Agile or agile, uppercase or lowercase. It's just "a simple workflow" or something like that, or else some explicit other workflow (like Shape Up). I think a lot of folks have been burnt out by Scrumfall and try to practice alternatives. I've made a point to start asking potential employers how they handle project management. If they say Agile of any sort, I'll assume the worst and just walk away...