Does agile make you uncomfortable?

[Scoobos]

It appears ion lots of ads, but very few really do it well. When it works, it's brilliant, but it needs top quality techies and minimal interference from management; how often do you find that combination?

WHS a bit!

I'll play my hand and say I hate it , I've worked on 6+ high profile projects using "scrum masters" and Agile methodologies and all but one was a MASSIVE failure, with costs escalating beyond anyones control.

The biggest issue I've seen is that people cannot budget properly with such massive requirement to have an infrastructure as "Agile" as the development team think they are. I've seen people go out and buy hardware thats needed for the release cycle in 4 weeks, then change their mind on whats required and leave the hardware depreciating for months on end.

Microsoft, Google et al aren't using it (I think google did experiment with it with Google Chrome and elements of chromebook development, but they've been failures in the Big G's eyes).

For me, the one time i saw it work, was the first time - it was very new and everyone was committed - now I think, as spod said (though not you G!!!) there are far to many know nothings, just jumping on the bandwagon as "Jedi Masters" or whatever crap they call themselves - creaming it and leaving after 1 release cycle.

Finally, in my rant of the day - Why is it that every single scrum master I've met (other than the successful one, co-incidentally) appears to have been schooled privately and posher than posh is posh... is this a new "Old boys" network forming already?

Agile, smagile...

[Lockhouse]

Finally, in my rant of the day - Why is it that every single scrum master I've met (other than the successful one, co-incidentally) appears to have been schooled privately and posher than posh is posh... is this a new "Old boys" network forming already?

Agile, smagile...

Nope - I'm a Scrum Master and I'm an oik.

[VectraMan]

Once you start assigning roles to people, you're clearly into BS territory. For me, the positive things are keeping close to release quality through the development cycle (i.e. don't leave your testing and bugfixing to the end), and the continual re-evaluation which ultimately results in a better product, and of course everybody knows that trying to specify something big and complicated in advance just doesn't work.

But I've yet to see any evidence that there's any benefit whatsoever to working in sprints.

The problem as always is people getting hung up on blindly following a process even when it clearly is doing more harm than good. It doesn't have to be "Agile" or "Not Agile"; you can choose to follow the good principles without engaging in all the BS.

[redgiant]

WHS a bit!

I'll play my hand and say I hate it , I've worked on 6+ high profile projects using "scrum masters" and Agile methodologies and all but one was a MASSIVE failure, with costs escalating beyond anyones control.

The biggest issue I've seen is that people cannot budget properly with such massive requirement to have an infrastructure as "Agile" as the development team think they are. I've seen people go out and buy hardware thats needed for the release cycle in 4 weeks, then change their mind on whats required and leave the hardware depreciating for months on end.

Microsoft, Google et al aren't using it (I think google did experiment with it with Google Chrome and elements of chromebook development, but they've been failures in the Big G's eyes).

For me, the one time i saw it work, was the first time - it was very new and everyone was committed - now I think, as spod said (though not you G!!!) there are far to many know nothings, just jumping on the bandwagon as "Jedi Masters" or whatever crap they call themselves - creaming it and leaving after 1 release cycle.

Finally, in my rant of the day - Why is it that every single scrum master I've met (other than the successful one, co-incidentally) appears to have been schooled privately and posher than posh is posh... is this a new "Old boys" network forming already?

Agile, smagile...

I sympathise as I have similar issues here with my current clientco - although the scrum masters here don't seem to be posh boys/girls

My biggest issue with the current clientco's use of agile is the lack of up front planning (e.g. scope, costs, resources and timescales) when kicking off projects. The way agile is implemented here is that although there are about 50 projects on the go at any time here only 8 are deemed to be top priority. These 8 like many of the other on going projects haven't been planned sufficiently enough in advance they all suffered from huge scope creep and end up taking up more resources, time etc. that would have otherwise been used to deliver the other projects.

It's not uncommon here for a project to last 2-3 years longer than originally planned for as project stakeholders use agile as a way of getting what they want delivered quicker without having to fully justify it at the expense of other project's work being completed.

Argh!!!

[Mich the Tester]

Once you start assigning roles to people, you're clearly into BS territory. For me, the positive things are keeping close to release quality through the development cycle (i.e. don't leave your testing and bugfixing to the end), and the continual re-evaluation which ultimately results in a better product, and of course everybody knows that trying to specify something big and complicated in advance just doesn't work.

But I've yet to see any evidence that there's any benefit whatsoever to working in sprints.

The problem as always is people getting hung up on blindly following a process even when it clearly is doing more harm than good. It doesn't have to be "Agile" or "Not Agile"; you can choose to follow the good principles without engaging in all the BS.

That's precisely what Agile's supposed to prevent. 'Individuals and interactions over processes and tools'.

[Scoobos]

Nope - I'm a Scrum Master and I'm an oik.

Didn't work in Berkshire in 2006 did you? ;-)

[minestrone]

Agile is hilarious with bobs, they cannot be left alone to work on a task with minimal instruction and be expected to complete it on their own steam.

[d000hg]

Sorry love, reality check.

If I'm paying the bill you do it my way.

So you're a typical micromanaging middle-manager type then? What a curveball

[GreenLabel]

Damn right.

Gobby know ****-alls like you are ten-a-penny, fortunately I can sniff you out before you even get to interview stage.

Give it a rest already. You're getting hysterical.