When a team of programmers is left to their own devices, they too screw shit up. They all do things in their own way and argue over what is best, and often fail to see the bigger picture.
I watch scope creep and lack of organizational planning from both programmers and managers. It’s all personality issues.
I also don’t believe anyone actually follows or knows what agile is (not saying I do either). Everyone on every team at every place sure talks about it, but it doesn’t seem like anyone actually does it. These are all just labels for “we adapted as we went.”
They all do things in their own way and argue over what is best, and often fail to see the bigger picture.
It sounds like your programming team is missing a senior engineer/director of engineering. You need an engineer who has the experience to see the big picture, architect solutions, and tell the team what’s what.
Found the PM/TPM. The best software was written without Agile and PMs/TPMs. It’s only after software becomes successful that the need is felt for that stuff.
The world runs on open source software and I don’t know of a single open source project that uses Agile or PMs/TPMs.
What? I’m not privy to RedHat/IBM/Google’s internal processes but they are all massive FOSS contributors at least some of which I assume are using Agile internally. The Linux kernel is mostly corpo-backed nowadays.
The development cycle of FOSS is highly compatible with Agile processes, especially as you tend towards the Linux Kernel style of contributing where every patch is expected to be small and atomic. A scrum team can 100% set as a Sprint Goal “implement and submit patches for XYZ in kernel”.
Also agile ≠ scrum. If you’re managing a small github project by sorting issues by votes and working on the top result, then congratulations, you’re following an ad-hoc agile process.
I think what you’re actually mad at is corporate structures. They systematically breed misaligned incentives proportional to the structure’s size, and the top-down hierarchy means you can’t just fork a project when disagreements lead to dead ends. This will be true whether you’re doing waterfall or scrum.
A development philosophy that nobody understands, or actually follows, but every company insists on using, even when it’s a poor fit for their projects.
A race to accrue as much technical debt as quickly as possible by focusing stricty on individual features while ignoring the long term ramifications of design decisions.
When a team of programmers is left to their own devices, they too screw shit up. They all do things in their own way and argue over what is best, and often fail to see the bigger picture.
I watch scope creep and lack of organizational planning from both programmers and managers. It’s all personality issues.
I also don’t believe anyone actually follows or knows what agile is (not saying I do either). Everyone on every team at every place sure talks about it, but it doesn’t seem like anyone actually does it. These are all just labels for “we adapted as we went.”
It sounds like your programming team is missing a senior engineer/director of engineering. You need an engineer who has the experience to see the big picture, architect solutions, and tell the team what’s what.
Found the PM/TPM. The best software was written without Agile and PMs/TPMs. It’s only after software becomes successful that the need is felt for that stuff.
The world runs on open source software and I don’t know of a single open source project that uses Agile or PMs/TPMs.
What? I’m not privy to RedHat/IBM/Google’s internal processes but they are all massive FOSS contributors at least some of which I assume are using Agile internally. The Linux kernel is mostly corpo-backed nowadays.
The development cycle of FOSS is highly compatible with Agile processes, especially as you tend towards the Linux Kernel style of contributing where every patch is expected to be small and atomic. A scrum team can 100% set as a Sprint Goal “implement and submit patches for XYZ in kernel”.
Also agile ≠ scrum. If you’re managing a small github project by sorting issues by votes and working on the top result, then congratulations, you’re following an ad-hoc agile process.
I think what you’re actually mad at is corporate structures. They systematically breed misaligned incentives proportional to the structure’s size, and the top-down hierarchy means you can’t just fork a project when disagreements lead to dead ends. This will be true whether you’re doing waterfall or scrum.
What’s agile?
A development philosophy that nobody understands, or actually follows, but every company insists on using, even when it’s a poor fit for their projects.
A race to accrue as much technical debt as quickly as possible by focusing stricty on individual features while ignoring the long term ramifications of design decisions.
/s
Not a PM. But please, keep trying with stereotypical internet replies.