Then you shorten iterations if you need to change priorities more often, or you stop the iteration and start a new one. Waterfall created a scenario where requirements couldn't be changed without significant effort. Agile creates a situation where those managing the backlog can change requirements whenever they see fit. And developers, next time an iteration is planned, take the top items from the backlog that fit into their iteration capacity.
The side effect of shorter iterations is that requirements have to be broken down to fit inside the smaller iteration, so there is a price to be paid by those managing the backlog and generating requirements if change needs to happen quickly.
Agile methodologies don't enable change as needed, they create a structured way of handling inevitable change. And when the backlog is adjusted to accommodate that change, the consequences of that change to budget and delivery date are easy for everyone to see.
If you don't have controls in place, then there is no understanding of the cost of change. And without understanding the cost, good cost-value decisions can't be made.
Shorten the iteration or abort it midway? Not gonna happen. Management loves having a Monday to Friday iteration. That structure and control is way more important to them than reaponding to change.
Shortening the iterations means you now how to rechop all your tasks and do the estimates again wasting even more time. Also the smaller the task the less people focus on the bigger picture and your software just turns into a mess of puzzle pieces.
Just my experiences from having to go through Agile Hell.
Then that confirms my OP - everyone wants to embrace the cosmetic pieces but the actual meat of Agile is ignored.
Every control has to have consequences, or else bad behavior has no cost. Your organization is addicted to what the calendar says, and the software is neglected. The consequences are suboptimal productivity and/or quality. Appearing to work has more value than completing work.
No software process is immune to leadership failures.
Wasting time? Measuring twice and cutting once is done because it saves time. As a shirt I saw recently said, "weeks of programming saves hours of planning".
Comments
And yet the very definition of the word, "Agility" is supposed to mean moving quickly and nimbly, able to easily change direction.
Then you shorten iterations if you need to change priorities more often, or you stop the iteration and start a new one. Waterfall created a scenario where requirements couldn't be changed without significant effort. Agile creates a situation where those managing the backlog can change requirements whenever they see fit. And developers, next time an iteration is planned, take the top items from the backlog that fit into their iteration capacity.
The side effect of shorter iterations is that requirements have to be broken down to fit inside the smaller iteration, so there is a price to be paid by those managing the backlog and generating requirements if change needs to happen quickly.
Agile methodologies don't enable change as needed, they create a structured way of handling inevitable change. And when the backlog is adjusted to accommodate that change, the consequences of that change to budget and delivery date are easy for everyone to see.
If you don't have controls in place, then there is no understanding of the cost of change. And without understanding the cost, good cost-value decisions can't be made.
Shorten the iteration or abort it midway? Not gonna happen. Management loves having a Monday to Friday iteration. That structure and control is way more important to them than reaponding to change.
Shortening the iterations means you now how to rechop all your tasks and do the estimates again wasting even more time. Also the smaller the task the less people focus on the bigger picture and your software just turns into a mess of puzzle pieces.
Just my experiences from having to go through Agile Hell.
Then that confirms my OP - everyone wants to embrace the cosmetic pieces but the actual meat of Agile is ignored.
Every control has to have consequences, or else bad behavior has no cost. Your organization is addicted to what the calendar says, and the software is neglected. The consequences are suboptimal productivity and/or quality. Appearing to work has more value than completing work.
No software process is immune to leadership failures.
Wasting time? Measuring twice and cutting once is done because it saves time. As a shirt I saw recently said, "weeks of programming saves hours of planning".