Over the past 25 or years, "Agile" has meant different things to different people, companies, associations, etc. This high variability dilutes the clarity and the value for whatever "agile" is trying to be and trying to avoid. Does anyone agree that there are numerous interpretations of agile? Does anyone agree that this variability renders the term "agile" to slowly be less meaningful? The list of what agile might mean feels long! Care to add to it? 😊
Frequency
Speed
Scope size
Predictability/Adaptability
Continuous
Pivoting
Working software, but no, now MORE than working software.
Do agile versus BE Agile
"Agile" is a mindset ... a "vibe"
Absent from most agile conversations includes: upfront cost, marginal cost, VUCA, and trustworthiness.
Broadly speaking, Agile (nor any software methodology) does not solve trustworthiness problems.
"Agile" tolerates untrustworthiness (problems related to competence, honesty, dependability, benevolence).
What am I missing? What else has tried to fit under the crowded umbrella of "agile?"
I know that "agile" solved the problem from the mid and late 1990s about frequency of go-live events. Webpages needed the structure to update webpages frequently.
Are there 2026 problems that remain unsolved?
Is agility the solution to these problems?
To what degree is ambiguity about "agile" relevant?
Is "agile" an invincible / bulletproof term?
Does "agile" simply mean that 1) I'm not rigid, and 2) "Get off my back?"
If few organizations are purely "agile" (so many of us are simply "hybrid"), what constitutes discipline, trustworthiness, and cost effectiveness? "Hybrid seems to simply avoid the most rigorous aspects of what it inherits from its components / predecessors.
The "ambiguity" of agile is clearly bothering me. 😊
