4 ms·

You click the 'twelve principles' link and go to http://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html http://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html For instance: "At regular

You click the 'twelve principles' link and go to http://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html http://agilemanifesto.org/principles.html For instance: "At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly." Oh hey! It's a process! Heck, it's like a meta-process, even. THE meta-process.

walterbell 12y ago
Heinz von Foerster has spoken about the interaction between properties of the observer and the observed. In the quote below, one could replace "obscene" with "agile" -- each is impervious to objective measurement. http://faculty.stevenson.edu/jlombardi/pdf's/cybernetics/cybernetics_cybernetics_hvf.pdf http://faculty.stevenson.edu/jlombardi/pdf's/cybernetics/cyb... "There is at aperiodic intervals a ritual performed by the supreme judges of this land in which they attempt to establish once and for all a list of all the properties that define an obscene object or act. Since obscenity is not a property residing within things (for if we show Mr. X a painting and he calls it obscene, we know a lot about Mr. X but very little about the painting), when our lawmakers will finally come up with their imaginary list we shall know a lot about them but their laws will be dangerous nonsense."
darkxanthos 12y ago
That appears to be the only point in that page that resembles a process. And really it's self-reflection as a principle. But really a process is more mechanical. The manifesto says "Hey! Reflect regularly." That is not the same thing as saying "We must have a retrospective every 2 weeks using the force direction exercise..." Your calling it a "meta-process" implies to me that you also get that distinction.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  'Your calling it a "meta-process" implies to me that you also get that distinction.' I interpreted "meta-process" as simply a remark that the process (presuming it is one, but that seemed to be the orientation of the author) addressed processes.
julian_t 12y ago
So? I really don’t see the problem with this. Sounds like you’re trying to make common sense into a bad thing ;-) “Process” seems to be used as a stick for both sides to beat their opponent with… you are either doing too much or too little. To me, a process is just an agreed way of doing things between a group of people. When it becomes a problem is when circumstances and experience tell you that this now isn’t the best way to proceed any more, but you still have to do it that way (and anyone who has worked for a large organisation will know what I mean) Processes ought to change with time, and a lot of problems arise when they don’t… and so regularly checking whether your way of doing things is working is just sensible.

walterbell 12y ago

Heinz von Foerster has spoken about the interaction between properties of the observer and the observed. In the quote below, one could replace "obscene" with "agile" -- each is impervious to objective measurement. http://faculty.stevenson.edu/jlombardi/pdf's/cybernetics/cybernetics_cybernetics_hvf.pdf http://faculty.stevenson.edu/jlombardi/pdf's/cybernetics/cyb... "There is at aperiodic intervals a ritual performed by the supreme judges of this land in which they attempt to establish once and for all a list of all the properties that define an obscene object or act. Since obscenity is not a property residing within things (for if we show Mr. X a painting and he calls it obscene, we know a lot about Mr. X but very little about the painting), when our lawmakers will finally come up with their imaginary list we shall know a lot about them but their laws will be dangerous nonsense."

darkxanthos 12y ago

That appears to be the only point in that page that resembles a process. And really it's self-reflection as a principle. But really a process is more mechanical. The manifesto says "Hey! Reflect regularly." That is not the same thing as saying "We must have a retrospective every 2 weeks using the force direction exercise..." Your calling it a "meta-process" implies to me that you also get that distinction.

dllthomas 12y ago
'Your calling it a "meta-process" implies to me that you also get that distinction.' I interpreted "meta-process" as simply a remark that the process (presuming it is one, but that seemed to be the orientation of the author) addressed processes.

julian_t 12y ago

So? I really don’t see the problem with this. Sounds like you’re trying to make common sense into a bad thing ;-) “Process” seems to be used as a stick for both sides to beat their opponent with… you are either doing too much or too little. To me, a process is just an agreed way of doing things between a group of people. When it becomes a problem is when circumstances and experience tell you that this now isn’t the best way to proceed any more, but you still have to do it that way (and anyone who has worked for a large organisation will know what I mean) Processes ought to change with time, and a lot of problems arise when they don’t… and so regularly checking whether your way of doing things is working is just sensible.