Agile tools/methods for construction to suggest?

Here is the confusion. Agile is a practice. Waterfall is a life cycle process. Then, you can use Agile with waterfall. And the other confusion is: Agile did not born with the manifesto. I worked with the Manifesto creators so I know about that. Why the name is Manifesto for Agile Software Development? Why the use of the word "software"? Because the authors wanted to explicit mentioned that the manifesto is an implementation of agile in the software field. Agile was born inside the USA DoD NSF/Agility Forum in 1990 (I was part of the forum) trying to find an answer to Lean. At the same time I was part of the group of authors of DSDM version 1 and 2 where I worked with Arie Van Bennekum between others and that was started in 1992 (DSDM was free of use at this time). Time ago (10 years more or less) people who have method to create software join together and created the manifesto for software. The work software is there for a reason. Now, the word software has been removed in some of them and the word solution is added.

On the other side Mounir the key is into the ambiguity or abstraction used into the Manifesto. Forgot my comments and search for Manifesto creators explanation about that. They made it lot of times but people did not read it. When you work to implement agile in software field for example and you take the manifesto as a guide the challenge is to define things like "deliver frecuently", "shorter timescale" etc. That must be defined at organizational level and that is a matter of quality. When you see that some agile implementations did not work is becasue of that. Organizations thinks that to implemente agile is so simple that to use a method. They forgot the systemic theory. The problem is: to much people talking about agile with no practical experience on it.

Great comment Stéphane. That is the challenge. Value is something to be defined at organizational level because it is a subjective term organizations must transform into objective one.. In fact it should be done inside the definition of quality which is a strategic topic due to for defining quality the organization must define the term "client". What is valuable for you it is not valuable for me. As you mentioned one of the fields where we have dealt with that form years is software due to something we only find into software: intangibility.

Value is beyond that. If not, think about Microsoft. it has no sense, from my point of view, to discuss about that when lot of information, techniques, history, and any other thing you want to name is outside there in the field or Quality. Value, Client, this type of things must be defined at strategical level. At this point the balance between value and grade must be defined too.

I did consider your first point, that the foundation could actually be a detriment to its resale. Please note that I only used the scenario as a demonstration of value. It does not make sense from an owner's perspective to sell your lot at that point in time. Even if you don't get your money out of the foundation, it is still accrued value towards your house.

I don't disagree your point Mounir, that a foundation is not something that "works" for the house owner. I was deliberately stretching the point to indicate that perhaps we need to rethink how we assign value.and how we define agile for industries' where something that "works" may be less than meaningful.