Skip to content

Feed aggregator

Agile Just Don’t Go ’round Here

More Agile Than Agile - Fri, 11/20/2009 - 22:30

One of my favourite scenes from Tombstone is when Ike Clanton says to Wyatt Earp, “Listen, Mr. Kansas Law Dog. Law don’t go around here. Savvy?”  After Wyatt replies that he’s retired, Ike reiterates “Yeah, that’s good, Mr. Law Dog, ’cause law don’t go around here.

A common theme that has been emerging from the classes I’ve been delivering and conversations I’ve been having are along the lines of “wow, we need to change our culture” or “agile won’t work here because … <insert excuse>“  There seems to be a clear delineation between these 2 camps.

I blogged previously about the importance culture has with an Agile transformation and I make sure that I convey that to anyone I talk to that is new to Agile.

The first statement I usually use to combat this fear, uncertainty and doubt is the fact that there always must be a reason to transform to Agile.  Companies aren’t switching for the sake of being cool and hip, well if they are they have bigger problems, but instead they are switching because fundamentally, the way they are working is broken.

Transforming to Agile requires a deep organizational commitment and a fundamental shift in how companies operate and how departments and people interact with each other.

So underneath the skepticism and FUD, what’s the REAL problem?  What are people afraid of?  Here’s a brief summary of the top 3 excuses for why Agile don’t go ’round here:

1) We can’t have a SINGLE product owner, we need multi-level signoff and too many people are “the go to guy”

2) Agile won’t work here, everybody works on multiple projects at the same time.

3) Management tells us we HAVE TO launch with all these features on this date.

Hmm.  So what do we do?  Where’s the Agile checklist that allows us to fix these problems?  I’ve seen Scrum teams absolutely banging their heads against a wall trying to figure out why their fixed-date, fixed-scope projects either don’t make it or have terrible quality.  In this cas,e the ‘rapid de-scoping phase‘ happens in order to make the date but in that instance the damage is already done.  The teams inability to say no has rendered their yes useless, mis-trust ensues and the cycle repeats itself.

I’ve had this post brewing for a few weeks and decided to post it after our pilot team’s recent success and after reading Gil Broza’s great post entitled “so you think you’re Agile?

While our topics do differ, the underlying tone is the same.  Organizations needs to understand what being Agile is.  They need to look to the manifesto, not to the Nokia Scrum test or a checklist.  They need to un-learn what has been instilled through so many years of the command and control approach.

AYE helped me change my approach from saying “here’s what you’re doing wrong and here’s the right things to do” to “what are you concerned about?  what are your challenges?  how can the knowledge and tools I have solve your problems

Lately that approach is working much better and I find people who want help are more likely to accept help.

Categories: Blogs

Deliver Software, Not the Plan

More Agile Than Agile - Wed, 11/18/2009 - 00:30

I attended the Rally webinar about Keys to Successful Release Planning and heard a great comment from the presenter:

“Focus on delivering software, not the plan.”

Think about that for a minute, it’s ok, I’ll wait.

<insert jeopardy music here>

One of the myths of Agile is  that Agile teams don’t plan.  Agile teams focus on ‘planning‘, not ‘the plan‘, there’s a difference.  Let’s face it, the software development industry moves quickly and for the lack of a better phrase it would just be completely nuts to plan out exactly what we will deliver for all of next year.  Sure we’ll have a loose plan for what we want to deliver based on what the company strategy is, but are we going to follow that plan into the ground or adjust to new information?  Remember, the Manifesto says we value responding to change over following a plan.

So what’s good about a plan? Everybody loves a plan.  Plans are what keep people accountable, plans are what make us comfortable, plans help us feel secure.  Once you have a plan, you have set expectations.

So what’s not-so-good about a plan? Once you have a plan, change is difficult due to the perceived chaos change introduces.  Once expectations are set, traditionally changes aren’t effectively communicated to all those who should know about it.  Plans can be used to place blame when things don’t go according to the plan.

At the end of the day we are delivering software, not a plan.  In the end when plans change and chaos ensues, the issue isn’t the plan, it’s communication.

Case in point, in our iteration 6 demo one of our stakeholders asked “I thought you were doing XYZ?”  Was it the stakeholders fault?  Nope.  Was it the outdated roadmap the entire company was looking at?  Nope, ok, maybe partially.   It was a communication problem.

We had failed to effectively communicate to all of our stakeholders the change to the plan.  Sure this change happened 3 months ago and sure this particular stakeholder hadn’t come to any previous demo but once this stakeholder had the plan in his hands 3 months ago,  his expectation was come hell or high water, we will deliver the plan.

This creates a vicious cycle, especially in organizations that lack trust.  If the team doesn’t deliver the plan, the business instinctively responds with more process and more control.  Obviously the team can’t be trusted if they can’t deliver on this simple plan we agreed to right?  People, especially teams, become deflated, morale sinks and people co-operate less for the fear of the ramifications of the decision to change the plan.   Another nasty side-effect is the battles about scope-creep.  We become so focused on arguing about what’s in-scope and what’s out-of-scope we lose sight of the fact we’re delivering software.

So how do we get out of this oscillating cycle?  First of all, communicate better.  Help the business, or folks having difficulties adjusting to Agile, understand why Agile teams plan the way they do.  Listen to their concerns about why they want a committed roadmap for the next 3 years.  People are often resistant to change but it’s important to not confuse their response with resistance.  There is always an underlying reason for why people respond the way they do, keep the communication open and move forward.  Of course you won’t always agree, but listening to others concerns is a great place to start.

Categories: Blogs

Scrum Knowledge Sharing

SpiraPlan is a agile project management system designed specifically for methodologies such as scrum, XP and Kanban.