Agile Doctor

There is an Agile principle which states, “Agile processes promote sustainable development. The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely”. It has become obvious to me, the word “sprint”, which, although it may have a specific meaning in scrum, generally is understood to mean “an act or short spell of running at full speed.”

I am often reminded of the difference between a cook and a chef in my agile practice. I have used this story numerous times with developers to explain agile development practices. Like me, it seems that some developers will always be cooks. While there are some who don’t know the difference, I have even run into some that prefer to be cooks instead of chefs. Not that there is anything wrong with choosing to be a cook, but it helps when one is aware of the choice and makes a conscious decision to be one.

My topic this week is the fall of a company I (still) have a great deal of affection for, one that I continue to support. To me this company “was” the internet and their rise and past prominence represented what was best of Silicon Valley. More troubling is their subsequent lack of direction and downfall represents what can be thought of as the worst of Silicon Valley. I am not the first (and will not be the last) to weigh in on the tragedy that goes by the name of Yahoo!

So when my friend mentioned that a good indicator for agile transformation success was a company had hit rock bottom I knew exactly what he was referring to. In this particular case he used the examples of the FBI Sentinel Project and Healthcare.gov website debacle. In both cases, it wasn’t until each was a total disaster that Agile was actually tried with any seriousness and rigor and in both cases the results were amazing.

I am often faced with explaining the various aspects of Agile to people new to Agile and I have come up with a very simple way to remember (and explain) Agile. I present to you now the “3Ps of Agile Software Development” with the hope you find this useful to your own understanding and an aid in your ability to explain Agile to others.

Scrum teams that work are small, co-located, dedicated, stable and cross-functional. These elements are essential in working in the complex world of software development. Recently, I stumbled across another reason that may explain the gains found on proper scrum teams – friendships.

This particular problem manifests when a company desires the potential benefits of Scrum without really understanding Scrum. Without a good understanding, people attempt to map their existing roles with those of Scrum. Let me make one thing perfectly clear. The role of Scrum Master is unique to Scrum and any attempt to map it to existing roles will only result in confusion, frustration and less than optimal outcomes.

If we want to create better software we would be well to head Glass’ fact. We need to stop treating software development like we are building a house or assembling a car. Software is much too complex to be built using the tired old mechanistic means. Remember that as complexity of the problem increases, the complexity of the solution increases at a much higher rate, along with the risks attendant on increased complexity.

While other scaling frameworks have detailed flowcharts, organizational structure documents, etc., Wagerfall avoids such complexities. Mindy Minter, Head Architect at Great Big Company, praises Wagerfall for its simplicity. “We are big believers in the KISS principle. You can’t get more KISS than Wagerfall. Pay your fee. Get your certification. Claim you’re Agile.”

This begs the question of what should those who are not Google or Facebook, those without unlimited resources and legions of potential candidates, do to improve their hiring of software development professionals? The first thing is to be aware of the true costs and benefits associated with pursuing one path over another.

I expect that coding interviews will be with us for some time to come, but at least I can look forward to the day when I write the blog “Company X abolishes the coding interview (and Admits Earth is Round).”

With scientific evidence questioning the effectiveness of brainstorming vast, the real question is why does the use of brainstorming persist? The question is at the heart of much of my agile practice in that the prime issue is not whether one is merely effective, but that one is optimal. It is obvious to me that several cognitive biases are in play in keeping brainstorming around.

As I think back on my coaching work in agile, the blogs I have written, the many discussions I have had and the presentations I have made, I think that all of these boil down into one very simple thing – my work is all about helping people understand the true nature of the software development business process and, thereby helping them to make better decisions.

If people cannot fail a test how good can the test be. Given this fact I am not even certain that a CSM should be part of the job description. A few months of “boots on the ground” scrum is better than the two-day training.

What is the high cost of “low cost” software development? This is the tendency for people involved with financial decisions regarding software development to put too great an emphasis on the cost of software developers.

In the case of annual reviews we have such a wealth of evidence they do not work it is amazing so few companies have actually done away with them.

One of the most enjoyable parts of my work and my life is delivering presentations or giving talks to outside groups. During one particular Q&A session I was asked a question along these lines - "If you had unlimited power in an organization, what would be the very first thing you would do to ensure agility?" My answer, "Oh that is easy. The very first thing I would do is get rid of the Project Management Office." At which I unfortunately took a pause. The collective gasp from the crowd filled that void and the ensuing murmur drowned out my next statement. You see, I was addressing a PMI group, and my statement proved to be provocative to say the least.

A few months back I stumbled onto some research done by Gallup on employee engagement quoted from above. I would like to say that their findings were shocking, but having been an Agile Coach at many large organizations, I find the statistics (and conclusions based on the statistics) to track quite close to my own experiences. For example, Gallup found that only 30% of all employees in the United States are “engaged and inspired at work” and about 20% are what have been defined as “actively disengaged” employees who “aren’t just unhappy at work; they’re busy acting out their unhappiness. Every day, these workers undermine what their engaged coworkers accomplish.” The remaining 1 out 2 workers are defined as “not engaged” and “essentially ‘checked out.’ They’re sleepwalking through their workday, putting time — but not energy or passion — into their work.”