4 ms·

Interesting answer, but I think you're refuting waterfall in general rather than the narrow point I was making about it. Overall I agree with you, waterfall is

by geebee 12y ago

Interesting answer, but I think you're refuting waterfall in general rather than the narrow point I was making about it. Overall I agree with you, waterfall is worse than agile. But to me, this is like saying that fighting and communicating only through lawyers is worse than getting together with trust and working out an agreement. Right, totally, agreed. But if the other side lawyers up and prepares for the "let's find who to blame!" that they suspect will happen in a couple of months, and you go in all ready to collaborate and work together, you're going to get steamrolled!

rbrcurtis 12y ago
Dude, you're a programmer. If you're in an organization where this is the norm, go find another job with a more enjoyable environment. There's a million out there for you.
exelius 12y ago
Right, but I was saying that the "biggest benefit" of waterfall was never actually one to begin with -- Agile was built around the assumption that requirements will constantly change because that's what happens in the real world. If requirements accuracy is the most important thing in your project, you deal with the change management implications. Otherwise, you go Agile and accept that you may not be able to guarantee a specific feature by a specific date/release. It's a two way street though: the business folks need to understand that they're giving up some control and predictability in exchange for lower overhead and faster delivery. This is the hardest part of Agile IMO since most business / product folks don't like not being in control. Agile gives engineering more autonomy, but only if the business respects that autonomy. If the business starts dictating too many processes/priorities, the whole thing crumbles into a waterfall mess (even if you call it "Agile").

4 ms·

Interesting answer, but I think you're refuting waterfall in general rather than the narrow point I was making about it. Overall I agree with you, waterfall is

by geebee 12y ago

rbrcurtis 12y ago
Dude, you're a programmer. If you're in an organization where this is the norm, go find another job with a more enjoyable environment. There's a million out there for you.
exelius 12y ago
Right, but I was saying that the "biggest benefit" of waterfall was never actually one to begin with -- Agile was built around the assumption that requirements will constantly change because that's what happens in the real world. If requirements accuracy is the most important thing in your project, you deal with the change management implications. Otherwise, you go Agile and accept that you may not be able to guarantee a specific feature by a specific date/release. It's a two way street though: the business folks need to understand that they're giving up some control and predictability in exchange for lower overhead and faster delivery. This is the hardest part of Agile IMO since most business / product folks don't like not being in control. Agile gives engineering more autonomy, but only if the business respects that autonomy. If the business starts dictating too many processes/priorities, the whole thing crumbles into a waterfall mess (even if you call it "Agile").