John TiesoAuthor, Lecturer in Business Management| The Catholic University of America, Busch School of Business & EconomicsArlington, Va, United States
Sergio, I certainly respect your opinion. Let me go back into my DoD CIM files to the Agile development we funded, and look at the reports and findings. Back to you shortly.
...
1 reply by Sergio Luis Conte
Jun 16, 2017 1:43 PM
Sergio Luis Conte
...
John, I was part of the USA DoD/NSF Agility Forum where Agile and Agility was "formally" defined. But Ok, no problem. The important thing is that Agile can be apply into waterfall life cycle process. That is what I sustain based on my personal academic and practical experience including my today work duties in my actual job place.
Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
Jun 16, 2017 1:38 PM
Replying to John Tieso
...
Sergio, I certainly respect your opinion. Let me go back into my DoD CIM files to the Agile development we funded, and look at the reports and findings. Back to you shortly.
John, I was part of the USA DoD/NSF Agility Forum where Agile and Agility was "formally" defined. But Ok, no problem. The important thing is that Agile can be apply into waterfall life cycle process. That is what I sustain based on my personal academic and practical experience including my today work duties in my actual job place.
...
1 reply by John Tieso
Jun 17, 2017 4:24 PM
John Tieso
...
Sergio, I looked through virtually everything major from before the Manifesto through the standardization process. There are, indeed, a series of activities which the Agile community has chosen to accept as 'practices' in lieu of actions, steps, or activities. They are contained in a very busy chart that looks a bit like the Metro chart here in DC. Nonetheless, in every instance, the discussion says that 'agile is a series of practices' performed during projects. Seems to be that an organized, defined sets of steps (by whatever term used) is a 'method' for doing work consistent with some defined procedure, or set of procedures.
In my world, the 'practices chart' would be a framework, containing descriptions of the method for doing work through activities (practices or procedures, etc.) toward a defined expected outcome.
Nonetheless, I have no problem with what people call something as long as they achieve success which can be replicated, and sustained long-term.
One place I do agree with you is that agile practices can be used to do project work flowing through a waterfall-type development. In fact, some of the early US Navy work on systems engineering, which advanced waterfall practices, could easily replace their discreet steps with practices on the Agile Roadmap.
It's been a long time since I looked through many of the old files. A lot of what we did then is far less efficient and useful than what we have today.
Saving Changes...
Stephen GreyAssociate Director| Broadleaf Capital International Pty LtdAustralia
Definitions don't really matter a lot, apart from removing ambiguity.
Some systems are fairly stable from sponsors' objectives and stakeholders' interests through requirements and development to roll out and operational use. Some are in a state of flux that shifts more rapidly than a traditional waterfall approach can deliver a product so using such an approach can result in a lot of pressure for changes as the work is progressing.
We are sometimes left with a choice between [1] delivering what we first said we would and finding it isn't what people want anymore or [2] constantly changing the scope, spec, roll out strategy and so on which can result in inefficiency, through having to redo work, and a sense that nothing is under control.
An agile approach is just mode or working that allows us to sense and respond to that complex ever shifting environment and adjust how we apply resources accordingly, using incremental deliveries to help us understand the system (the external environment as well as the project) as well as to create something of value. Snowden's Cynefin framework is a useful way to make sense of dealing with complex and orderly parts of a project, best suited to agile and traditional approaches respectively, in hand at the one time. Saving Changes...
John TiesoAuthor, Lecturer in Business Management| The Catholic University of America, Busch School of Business & EconomicsArlington, Va, United States
Jun 16, 2017 1:43 PM
Replying to Sergio Luis Conte
...
John, I was part of the USA DoD/NSF Agility Forum where Agile and Agility was "formally" defined. But Ok, no problem. The important thing is that Agile can be apply into waterfall life cycle process. That is what I sustain based on my personal academic and practical experience including my today work duties in my actual job place.
Sergio, I looked through virtually everything major from before the Manifesto through the standardization process. There are, indeed, a series of activities which the Agile community has chosen to accept as 'practices' in lieu of actions, steps, or activities. They are contained in a very busy chart that looks a bit like the Metro chart here in DC. Nonetheless, in every instance, the discussion says that 'agile is a series of practices' performed during projects. Seems to be that an organized, defined sets of steps (by whatever term used) is a 'method' for doing work consistent with some defined procedure, or set of procedures.
In my world, the 'practices chart' would be a framework, containing descriptions of the method for doing work through activities (practices or procedures, etc.) toward a defined expected outcome.
Nonetheless, I have no problem with what people call something as long as they achieve success which can be replicated, and sustained long-term.
One place I do agree with you is that agile practices can be used to do project work flowing through a waterfall-type development. In fact, some of the early US Navy work on systems engineering, which advanced waterfall practices, could easily replace their discreet steps with practices on the Agile Roadmap.
It's been a long time since I looked through many of the old files. A lot of what we did then is far less efficient and useful than what we have today.
...
1 reply by Wade Harshman
Jul 20, 2017 9:21 AM
Wade Harshman
...
John and Sergio,
Thank-you for this exchange. I believe you've both elevated the level of discourse on this forum.
Agile is not the replacement of the waterfall or vice versa, these are different ways of working on a project, at this time I avoid the use of words: practice and method, for the vision points Sergio and John
On the other hand, for John and Sergio, a light definition of methodology, is the set of steps and actions to perform a task, work or to obtain an objetive, there are obviously other definitions, but keep this in mind for a moment: from this point of view John is right, and maybe, when Sergio participated in the iniciative, they dont thought into an metodologhy for Agile definition, so both of you have your reason to defend his point of view and both could be right, and please accept my apologies if Im wrong Saving Changes...
Stephen GreyAssociate Director| Broadleaf Capital International Pty LtdAustralia
Dr Steve Hodgkinson, CIO of the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, spoke on bringing common sense into the process, making strategic decisions to stabilise platforms while employing an agile approach to deal with short term requirements https://www.landell.com.au/images/document..._Hodgkinson.pdf
His insight into the influence of the human and administrative systems surrounding such work is very useful. The concept of a "Minimum Visible Product" to consolidate support and allow the process to proceed touches on this.
...
1 reply by Vincent Guerard
Jun 18, 2017 10:11 PM
Vincent Guerard
...
Thanks for the links
Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
Just to clarify my point let me say. As Stephen said it does not matter in this context. Because the places I worked and place I studied my doctorate (Cargnegie Mellon SEI) I have the possibility to work in Toyota before TPS was named Lean, I have the possibility to be part of USA DoD NSF/Agility Forum where Agile and Agility was formally defined taken the TPS ideas, and I was part of the group of authors of DSDM (version 1 and 2) where I worked with Arie Van Benekum one of the Manifesto creators. After that I worked from 1990 up to know helping organizations to implement Agile to gain in Agility and I continue my research. BUT WHAT IT MATTER (sorry the capital letter) for me is to send the message to all organizations that they can take advantage to apply Agile and to gain in Agility from strategy formulation to strategy implementation AND it is totally independent of the method they will use to do things, the process they will use to do things. For example, in my today work place, we have five different life cycles defined to do things. Any type of things. Inside those method you will find pure predictive, pure adaptative, mix of them but ever, ever with focus on quality and client, which is Agile by definition. That is the message I´d like to send in order encourage people to make research and understand that Agile is not what lot of people said it is. Saving Changes...
Dr Steve Hodgkinson, CIO of the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, spoke on bringing common sense into the process, making strategic decisions to stabilise platforms while employing an agile approach to deal with short term requirements https://www.landell.com.au/images/document..._Hodgkinson.pdf
His insight into the influence of the human and administrative systems surrounding such work is very useful. The concept of a "Minimum Visible Product" to consolidate support and allow the process to proceed touches on this.
For an organization that is considering Agile, how would you characterize the first 3 things it needs to do right to blend lifecycle project management (i.e. PMI) and agile? I am curious about this because projects with a significant non-IT scope (e.g. organizational/employee changes) might not want to (or can't?) abandon the lifecycle approach for delivery. Saving Changes...
Wade HarshmanScrum Master| GDITIndianapolis, In, United States
Jun 17, 2017 4:24 PM
Replying to John Tieso
...
Sergio, I looked through virtually everything major from before the Manifesto through the standardization process. There are, indeed, a series of activities which the Agile community has chosen to accept as 'practices' in lieu of actions, steps, or activities. They are contained in a very busy chart that looks a bit like the Metro chart here in DC. Nonetheless, in every instance, the discussion says that 'agile is a series of practices' performed during projects. Seems to be that an organized, defined sets of steps (by whatever term used) is a 'method' for doing work consistent with some defined procedure, or set of procedures.
In my world, the 'practices chart' would be a framework, containing descriptions of the method for doing work through activities (practices or procedures, etc.) toward a defined expected outcome.
Nonetheless, I have no problem with what people call something as long as they achieve success which can be replicated, and sustained long-term.
One place I do agree with you is that agile practices can be used to do project work flowing through a waterfall-type development. In fact, some of the early US Navy work on systems engineering, which advanced waterfall practices, could easily replace their discreet steps with practices on the Agile Roadmap.
It's been a long time since I looked through many of the old files. A lot of what we did then is far less efficient and useful than what we have today.
John and Sergio,
Thank-you for this exchange. I believe you've both elevated the level of discourse on this forum. Saving Changes...
