Tailoring as Design: From Rigid Methods to Fit-for-Purpose

Jim Highsmith is co-author of the Agile Manifesto with 60 years of experience as an IT manager, product manager, project manager, consultant, software developer, and agile pioneer.

  Agile  

This is Part 4 of The Project Success Rewired series:

Part 1: When the Old Metrics Fail You
Problem framing and the origin of measurement tension

Part 2: Measuring What Matters Next
Capability Metrics in the Age of Uncertainty

Part 3: Diagnosing Dysfunctional Metrics

Scene 1: The Metaphor That Stuck
Tailoring isn’t just about metrics—it’s about how we shape the rhythm of a project. Designing a plan that’s part prescriptive and part adaptive demands advanced capability—the kind reflected in the Capability Compass, where Value, Judgment, Capability, and Tension form the four points of every adaptive decision.

The XP discussion group had been circling the same point for weeks. Vendors kept insisting their heavyweight frameworks could be “tailored” for small projects. Then Larry Constantine broke the spell with his now-famous quote: "Doing extreme programming (XP) by way of the Rational Unified Process (RUP) was like buying an 18-wheel moving van, throwing away the trailer, chopping down the cab, swapping the diesel for a four-banger, and adding seats for a quick run to the store." Everyone laughed, but the laughter came with a sting.

Arin (VP of Strategic Outcomes) gestured toward the Compass diagram on the wall. “This is what happens when we confuse disassembly with design. Tailoring touches …

Please log in or sign up below to read the rest of the article.