Individuals and interactions over processes and tools

The first statement of the Agile Manifesto is quite interesting (And counter-intuitive): Individuals and Interactions should be valued more than processes and tools or People over Processes. There are many perspectives to understand this: What this says is that People are more important than processes, that when it comes to a conflict between people and processes always choose people, that spend more energy on people and less on processes.

The way it becomes counter-intuitive is that many of the biggest organisations rely on processes more than people. And it makes sense to rely on processes as processes are rigid, reliable and error-free. People on the other hand can do mistakes. So the Manifesto placing people over processes is revolutionary in ways.

Let me give an example here: Suppose there are 10 people in a small startup working on a product. There are two ways (on the top level) to go about releasing the product.

• First, one can let the teamwork as they wish and deliver the product. The CEO in this case should focus on keeping the morale of the team high. It should be ensured that all the people know the motivation behind the product, and they are motivated to build the product. One way of doing this is by keeping the people as the decision maker while brainstorming on the product specifications. This will make the team more attached to the product and they will take more accountability. The CEO should not interfere with the processes the team is following or the tools they are using. Rather, freedom should be provided to the team to work and deliver as they wish.
• Second, one can set up a clear product specification document and ask the team to work on specific timelines. In this case, the energy of the CEO will be spent on setting up the right specifications, right processes, clear communication etc. But the team in itself becomes less relevant than the process. In this case, the tools the team will be using, and the processes they will be following will be predefined. And hence, the sense of belongingness will reduce.

Now, what is a better way to work?

The Second method is probably more reliable. The accountability and control lie with the CEO. And it probably makes sense, as CEO is taking the most amount of risk and hence should have the most amount of control. The Product feasibility might be more because the Product Owner (CEO) will come with experience. The team will also have fewer things to worry about, all they have to focus is on delivering their individual chunks of work.

The First method is risky at best. It is a new way of working and hence there is very less precedent to follow. The control lies with the team and hence it becomes very important to hire the right people and guide them in the right way. The CEO has to be more of a people person rather than a process/product person. On top of all this, People do mistakes. There is no guarantee the product will ever be released.

So why does the Agile Manifesto prefer the First method?

One reason might be that the capabilities of people are infinite. A process (or tool) on the other hand is finite in capabilities. A process becomes reliable only when you know what it would deliver and when it would deliver. This means a process can not be slower or faster at the same time, It cannot deliver something which is not planned. In the case of people though, no one can predict the what and when of deliveries. This thing is the key stepping stone to innovation. Innovation doesn't come from safe and reliable processes, it comes from unpredictable people and uncertain products.

One important point to note here is that Innovation is the key thing that propelled growth in human civilisation. For all the people who believe in capitalism, Innovation is the key to infinite capital. And this is also one of the key reasons that so many big organisations are trying to become Agile. Being Agile goes hand in hand with having infinite scope for generating capital. Well, this explains why organisations want to be Agile, and Why Agility says: people over processes. But what is there for the people themselves?

Well, people in Agile organisations are inherently happier. They have a feeling of belongingness, a feeling of ownership, they have freedom and they have a bigger purpose to contribute to. There are many more advantages, but the point I am trying to make is that Agility is a win-win situation for both People and Organisations.

We all see nowadays how startups are getting bigger and bigger and how startups are beating Big Corporates at their own game. One critical reason behind this is the Startup's capability of being Agile, of putting people over processes, of letting people take ownership and deliver. That's maybe the biggest reason that even Google and Amazon are Agile Organisations.

People over Processes have one more advantage, lean processes are created that suit individual teams. People adhere more to the processes because the processes are made by people for people. (more of a democratic approach to processes)

So, prepare for a future where people are always prioritised over processes, where the scale of growth is infinite, and where capitalism goes hand in hand with empowering people.

-Anuj

Images:

[1] Freepik

[2] Freepik