Going after "simple" Is both a red herring and the cause of much Agile adoption failure

 

In my prior post (Understanding Simple Isn't Simple) I talked about what we really want is not "simple to understand or simple in design" but simple to use, simple to expand and/or change, and basically simple to be effective with.

This requires more than a few values and practices. As I've stated before - it requires a theory in order to guide us in learning what's effective. We also much be looking to go in the right direction. That is - are we adding value to our stakeholders? How can we quantify that?

Lean and Flow suggest that we can increase this by focusing on items of the greatest value and how to reduce delays and the waste they cause. Adding how to do this to whatever approach you are following may make its description less simple, but would definitely increase its effectiveness. 

The focus on simple to understand has resulted in many key, essential concepts being left out for many Agile adoptions. The assumption that people will figure these things out (e.g., MBIs, focused solution teams, value stream mapping) has been shown to be false for almost 2 decades now.

Let's stop looking at simple to understand and focus on how we can get to effectiveness