Agile is dead: Long Live Agile!

Agile is dead: Long Live Agile!

Introduction

Today, we delve into the realms of Product Management and Project Management—two seemingly distinct professions with a common goal: creating value for customers. We will explore this extreme concept and dissect the disparities between traditional and agile methodologies, shedding light humorously on why Agile, in its current form, is destined to meet its demise. Finally, we will unravel ways to resurrect Agile.

Agile vs Waterfall

Over the course of several years, different project management methodologies and frameworks have been developed for different business cases. In project management, it is crucial to understand your budget, scope of the project, and team dynamics and pick the right methodology to ensure that your projects are heading in the right direction.

When it comes to implementing an effective project management style, the two major categories professionals often feel conflicted about are the Agile and traditional project management. The ‘Traditional vs Agile project management’ debate is not a recent one and both approaches come with their own set of advantages and disadvantages.

Waterfall vs Agile

Both these frameworks come with their own set of principles, processes, and best practices. What you choose entirely depends on your project and your team’s needs.

Let’s take a detailed look at both of these and see how to find the one that suits your style best.

Traditional Project Management

Traditional project management (Waterfall Methodology) is a linear approach where processes occur in a predictable sequence. In this approach, the project follows a preplanned set of stages and assumes that the requirements remain fixed while the budget and project timeline can be changed. This approach is more suitable for projects where the possibility of changes in the scope is negligible.

The office of the Project Manager holds all the responsibility of the project and is accountable for the results.

Since traditional project management heavily relies on proper planning and analysis in the development phase, the resulting development process is quite streamlined. This allows the project manager to focus on different tasks since the project team works without minimum guidance unless an issue is raised.

V Model and its Charm

An extension of the Waterfall model, the V Model, with its testing phases aligned to each development stage, introduces an intriguing dynamic.

The V-Model

Therefore, for every stage in the development cycle, there is an associated testing phase. The corresponding testing phase of the development phase is planned in parallel. This model is also known as the verification and validation model.

The first phase is to gather requirements. The SRS is prepared at this stage. The acceptance design plan is also done in this phase. It is the input for acceptance testing. The design phase involves two steps. The architecture design involves the architecture required for the system. It is known as the high-level design. The module design is known as low-level design. The actual coding starts in the coding phase.

In unit testing, the small modules or units are tested. The integration testing is to test the flow of the two different modules. The system testing is to check the functionality of the entire system. The acceptance testing is to test the software in user environment. It also checks whether the system is in line with the software requirement specification.

Overall, the v model is suitable, when the project is short and when the requirements are very clear. It is a not a suitable project for the large, complex and object-oriented projects.

This model in my opinion has a special charm. You might object that beauty does not affect the eficacy of the method, but I like to think that it plays an important role. In this regard, the physicist Paul Dirac said:

The researcher, in his effort to express mathematically the fundamental laws of Nature, must aim above all at mathematical beauty.

Benefits of Traditional Project Management

Before proclaiming the end of traditional project management, it's imperative to recognize its merits. From providing clear direction to maintaining high levels of control, traditional methodologies offer a structured approach that is indispensable in certain project scenarios. In additiona there's a clear Single point of Accountability, the Project Manager and the documentation is a must, that not only standardizes the whole process but also can be used for guidance during other projects in the future.

Introduction to Agile Project Management Methodology

Agile Project Management, a contemporary and adaptable project management approach, has become a prevalent topic in recent times. The 2017 Pulse of the Profession survey revealed that 71% of organizations opted for an agile approach in their projects, with its adaptability standing out as a key driver.

Characterized by an iterative methodology, APM places a strong emphasis on customer feedback, flexibility, and seamless collaboration among team members. The core objective of Agile is to enable project teams to navigate changes effectively while ensuring the final product aligns with customer expectations.

The Agile framework achieves this through the subdivision of projects into smaller, time-boxed sprints, typically lasting around 2 weeks. These sprints empower project teams to dynamically respond to alterations and advancements. Notably, customer collaboration is a cornerstone of the APM framework, with regular updates sent to customers and their feedback promptly incorporated.

Historically, companies predominantly concentrated on refining processes related to software development. In the pre-millennial era, organizations struggled to meet customer expectations due to a lack of techniques. Despite endeavors to implement rigorous processes like the Rational Unified Process, the quality remained questionable, and customer satisfaction was elusive.

The Fundamental Flaws of Agile

Despite being the operational cornerstone of the tech industry for over two decades, Agile is not without its flaws. As we analyze these drawbacks, we'll strive to discern whether Agile, in its current form, is indeed facing a reckoning.

The practice of iterating on a living product in the market is a luxury of software — updates can be pushed at any time; assembly lines and tooling don’t need to be revamped. Every technology product should be built in stages but it also must be built towards an end goal and a fully realized product. Success requires strategy, research, design, and genchi genbutsu, just as The Toyota Way intended. The Agile vs. Waterfall argument is a false dichotomy: a company can have a long-term strategy and carry it out while still releasing the product incrementally, iteratively.

There are a number of reasons why project management professionals prefer Agile methodology to traditional frameworks, in particular:

  • Enhanced Flexibility
  • Transparency
  • Effective Collaboration
  • Efficient Problem Solving
  • Reduced Complexities

But several times the limitations are higer that the benefits:

  • Inadequate documentation: Agile's focus on rapid delivery can lead to insufficient documentation.
  • Unpredictable delivery time and costs: Agile can be challenging to estimate delivery times and costs, especially for complex projects.
  • Dependence on client involvement: Agile projects require significant client involvement, which may not be possible in all cases.I
  • Inadequacy for certain types of projects: Agile is not well-suited for projects with fixed requirements or requiring high predictability.

Choosing the Right Methodology and Hybrid Project Management

As we navigate the intricacies of project management, the need for a nuanced approach becomes apparent. We'll compare the sequential rigor of Waterfall with the adaptive nature of Agile, contemplating the importance of aligning the chosen methodology with the project's unique characteristics.

Acknowledging the criticisms and challenges faced by both traditional and agile methodologies, we'll explore how rigid thinking can impede progress. The quest for project management excellence demands flexibility and adaptability.

The key to navigating this landscape lies in hybrid project management methodologies that combine the planning rigor of Waterfall with the flexibility of Agile:

  1. Flexibility and Structure: Recognizing the limitations of a one-size-fits-all approach, the emergence of hybrid project management methodologies offers a promising middle ground. A blend of Agile's flexibility and Waterfall's structure resulted in improved product quality and reduced time to market.
  2. Phased and Iterative: a phased approach for well-defined components and an iterative approach for uncertain ones.
  3. Customer Involvement and Predictability: Striking a balance between customer involvement and project predictability in a pragmatic approach.
  4. Balanced approach: From risk mitigation to efficient resource utilization, these hybrid methods showcase the adaptability required in modern project management.
  5. Efficient use of resources: Hybrid approaches offer the stability of resource-intensive, long-term planning while providing the flexibility to adapt rapidly to market demands.

Agile and Scrum are dead

The once-undisputed prominence of Scrum in Agile frameworks is facing skepticism in recent years. Organizations are losing trust in Scrum's ability to deliver consistent value creation. We'll explore the reasons behind this shift and the emergence of alternative frameworks like SAFe, Scrumban, Kanban, or other frameworks.

In my very personal opinion, companies want to be Agile but struggle to renounce the old "command and control" style.

Scrum isn't tailored for organizations resistant to change; success with Scrum necessitates a cultural shift. While many grasp the technical intricacies of Scrum, such as roles, events, and artifacts, only a minority truly comprehend its values. Without embodying these values, realizing Scrum's promised benefits becomes an unattainable feat.

The impending collapse of Agile is rooted in a lack of understanding and adherence to its core values. The technical aspects of Agile may be well-known, but the values that underpin its success are often overlooked. Without a genuine commitment to these values, the promises of Agile and Scrum remain elusive.

Long live Agile!

The world is complex, and Scrum is a framework to help explore the unknown. It is less efficient than Waterfall, but it is an option available when requirements are not fully defined in advance.

At the same time, the framework alone is the initial building block of chaos if it is not accompanied by solid product management (with product vision, metrics, domain knowledge, and a roadmap) and modern project management (with focus on benefits rather than deliverables).

Without Agility we won't survive!

Can Agile be dead?

No! Without Agility we won't survive!

According to Darwin’s Origin of Species, it is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself.

Megginson, ‘Lessons from Europe for American Business’, Southwestern Social Science Quarterly (1963) 44(1): 3-13, at p. 4.

Charles Darwin

Survival in a dynamic environment requires agility. Drawing inspiration from Darwin, we recognize that it's not the most intellectual or the strongest that survives, but the one most adaptable to change. Agility becomes synonymous with "survival of the fittest" in the ever-evolving landscape of project and product management.

Hilarious Disclaimer: Just to be clear, in the evolutionary sense, "fitness" refers to the rate of reproductive output among a group of genetic variants. But hey, we're not discussing reproduction here; after all, that's not exactly developers' forte.

By the way, ever wonder about the difference between Tinder and LinkedIn? In the former, not-so-lucky guys seek out cute girls, who inevitably reject their advances. In the latter, well, roles are hilariously reversed.

How to Succeed with Agile

Success with Agile requires a holistic approach. Product Owners must be accountable for outcomes, developers empowered to self-organize, and Scrum Masters given the authority to facilitate true autonomy. The path to success involves incentivizing excellence, investing in foundational efforts like design systems and clean tech stacks, and prioritizing user experience and operational efficiency.

Scrum Might Need a Restart to Survive

The agile framework, particularly Scrum, may need a reset to stay relevant. The initial building block of chaos can only be transformed into a powerful tool for value delivery when accompanied by solid product management and modern project management practices.

Embracing Change

Bold companies willing to change their hearts and organizational culture can excel with Scrum. Key indicators of a company's readiness for success include the integration of a Chief Product Officer into the executive team, a focus on providing directions rather than instructions, empowerment of Scrum Teams to experiment with alternatives, and the establishment of Product Discovery as an indispensable investment in finding problems worth solving.


要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了