Ambiguity about "Agile"

Thank you, Thomas.
I *do* feel fortunate to have been able to participate in the performing arts so much. Improv, partner dance, theater, and music have all been fun and useful metaphors for collaboration and teamwork in business. The benefits of growing up in a small town with little else to do. 😊

Regarding your question about flow, “Absolutely.”
Teams have many moving parts. Flow doesn't magically happen. Flow has predecessors.

Thoughtful predecessors.

The predecessors of flow require discipline in the ensemble’s mechanics.
Modularity, boundaries, shape, sequence, interdependencies, synchronization, interchangeability, duration, latency, rhythm, practice, expertise, expectations, and scale. This feels like a healthy list of predecessors for flow.

Think of the synchronization needed to execute a World Cup! 😊
Hosting a World Cup requires incredibly low ambiguity.
Precision and explicitness is not rigidity, however.
In good documentation, the ink is always wet, ready for the next project to rewrite, improve, etc.

It’s valuable to distinguish mechanics from style.
Mechanics: technique, discipline, standardization, structure, frame, transferable skills, humility, questions, what is “systematic.”
Style: expression, empathy, customization, flexibility, freedom, creativity, non-transferable skills, self-esteem, answers, what is “sampling.”

A dancer who hasn’t mastered mechanics must always look at their feet. They cannot give attention to style, their dance partner, creativity, or fun surprises.
A musician with no muscle memory is trapped within mechanics … a singer struggling with notes … cellists and pianists looking at their fingers. They cannot give attention to expression.

Pablo Picasso has a great quote, “Learn the rules like a pro so you can break them like an artist.”
One related phrase I like is “freedom within the frame.”

The best ensembles possess impressive mechanics and impressive style. They have high discipline and high empathy.
The worst ensembles are all “style.” They shrug at mechanics, discipline, and empathy.

We could look at project teams as Q&A Factories.
From project to project, team to team, the answers have little in common.
But questions (prompts) that teams must ask themselves have a lot in common.
That is standardization, expertise, and clarity.
These have high upfront cost – the predecessor to flow and creativity. They’re attractive because they bring a company low marginal cost.

I like creativity in a team’s style and empathy.
I do not like creativity in a team’s mechanics and discipline.
“Creativity” in a team’s mechanics is prone to noise, sprawl, waste, micro-managing, reinventing the wheel, and incompetence.

“Unanswered questions” in a project are not synonymous with “ambiguity.”
Ambiguity in a project is lacking the right questions.
Great leaders have great questions. They rarely have the best answers themselves.
Lacking good questions is synonymous with a leadership void.

When teams are “on-script,” they imitate a symphony or a theater production.
When teams are “off-script,” they imitate improvisation.
Improvisation is not chaos. It is “Yes And” (resembling traceability).
Improvisation is “Bring a Brick, Not a Cathedral.”
Improvisation has discipline and rules when a team is “off-script.”
Jazz musicians are not in chaos. They have “freedom with the frame.”
Jazz musicians still have structure. Look at an improvising trumpet or trombone player and look how hard they are concentrating. Jazz musicians are not oblivious to the other musicians. They are still acutely aware of what’s going on around them. This is high discipline and high empathy.
I played in my high school’s jazz band for four years. I was not a good improviser. I had to “pre-plan” my “improvised” solos.
I’ve performed in two different a cappella groups. Some of the singers “scat” very well and enjoyed it. Neither of those are true for me. 😊
Improvisation is “I got your back.” It rejects a culture of “Watch your back.”

Ambiguity tolerates communication traffic jams, which is poor flow.
Many teams today are in meeting gridlock and communication traffic jams.
This is one problem I’m trying to solve.
We can convert communication traffic jams into communication symphonies.

Thanks Aaron. I appreciate that perspective. You are right that I might have to lower my expectations of "agile" even though there are numerous occasions of practitioners trying to shove MORE under the umbrella of all things agile, arguably RAISING the expectations of agile.

My plain, reptilian caution about agile is the ambiguity of the term and its counterproductivity.

If we equate agile with ambiguity, it follows that companies should hire me because I'm an expert "in shaping a culture of ambiguity." That feels off to me. It's up there with the quote from the manifesto to "maximize the amount of work not done" touting about "speed" of agile in the same conversation.

I agree it's prudent to lower expectations of all things "agile."

Also, agreed that ...

Businesses are interested in results and outcomes; i.e., what is "behind the glass"
Businesses are less interested in decisions and culture; i.e., what is "in front of the glass."

Businesses want the thermometer and the speedometer.
Businesses shrug at the thermostat and the gas pedal.

Businesses want lagging indicators and shrug at leading indicators.

When we have an affinity for uncertainty ...

Fog is in favor.
Clarity is out of favor.

Standardization falls out of favor.
Reinventing the wheel is in favor.

Scale and scaling expectations are out of favor.

Expectations disappear.

And that is where the industry is headed.
VUCA is in favor.
Expectations are out of favor.
For many professions, ambiguity is the point.
Except in certification exams. 😊 Hee hee.

That's not quite where I was going (I appreciate the laugh - I needed it), but I admit it does sometimes feel ridiculous to be expected to commit to a delivery date before the requirements have even been discussed, for example. That's the kind of ambiguity I was referring to.

I don't think agile should promote ambiguity. Some uncertainty is inherent in complex work; no need to add to it. The goal, in my view, is to expose and then reduce that uncertainty over time, not pretend it doesn't exist or accept it indefinitely.