Timeline for How do you explain to an "agile" team that they still need to plan the software they write?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 19, 2015 at 19:35 | comment | added | JoeBrockhaus | Re-work WILL happen, but you need to insure you do it sooner than later, and set client expectations accordingly. The biggest benefit of Agile becomes apparent once both sides swallow that pill, because iterative conflict resolution improves quality. In this particular case, it sounds like the dev team waited too long to rise issues for fear of upsetting the clients that a sprint would be deferred, and when that goes on for some time, you wind up with a spaghettified codebase, less reliable estimations, and many of the frustrations you experienced. | |
| Feb 19, 2015 at 19:34 | comment | added | JoeBrockhaus | Agile, but more specifically, Sprint Zero, generally requires either a fair amount of experience developing incrementally-developed applications, or the up-front expectations that future sprints will be hijacked by exhaustive re-factoring. Both of these are competing priorities, and both are initiated from opposite ends of the SDLC players: clients and developers. Clients want something tangible fast, and a well-initiated Agile project can take some time to get off the ground in a sustainable way. Experience helps get you sustainable quicker, without too much re-work later. | |
| Sep 4, 2012 at 15:17 | comment | added | Paul | Can some of the advocates give us examples of the projects they did successfully in Agile? Did you just start with the users making (only a handful of starter (doesn't agile say something like "don't think too far ahead?)) stories, and then start banging out tests and code? I'm in the camp of not understanding how that works. | |
| Sep 4, 2012 at 11:02 | answer | added | AncientSwordRage | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 23, 2011 at 23:22 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| May 23, 2011 at 19:39 | answer | added | Bill | timeline score: 9 | |
| May 23, 2011 at 18:17 | comment | added | Rein Henrichs | It's obvious that you're frustrated with a poor application of agile principles, but this seems like a rant thinly disguised as a question. To be clear: Agile favors "responding to change over following a plan", which means that "while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more." It is certainly possible to value following a plan too little, which seems to be the case here. | |
| May 23, 2011 at 18:12 | answer | added | Dave | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 23, 2011 at 1:57 | answer | added | jhocking | timeline score: 9 | |
| May 23, 2011 at 0:44 | answer | added | Robin Vessey | timeline score: 5 | |
| May 23, 2011 at 0:24 | answer | added | Peter K. | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 22, 2011 at 23:51 | answer | added | PeterAllenWebb | timeline score: 11 | |
| May 22, 2011 at 23:25 | answer | added | quickly_now | timeline score: 53 | |
| May 22, 2011 at 17:48 | answer | added | Martin Wickman | timeline score: 16 | |
| May 22, 2011 at 12:12 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/72273665047269376 | ||
| May 22, 2011 at 10:48 | answer | added | richard | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 22, 2011 at 10:47 | answer | added | Ladislav Mrnka | timeline score: 37 | |
| May 22, 2011 at 10:00 | comment | added | user23157 | @Marjan Venema - that is my concern. I'm sure that agile never meant "no design" like "don't prematurely optimise" didn't mean "don't write efficient code". But that seems to be the mass market interpretation of it. The way agile emphasises communication is great, and a really refreshing change, but it seems to me that in agile world the software itself is more of an afterthought. | |
| May 22, 2011 at 9:56 | comment | added | user23157 | Well to a certain extent I've had it up to the neck with "agile". At every turn agile seems to be stopping anyone from writing a decent line of code and it all starts with the agile premise of "we don't document," the corollary of which is "we don't plan". I don't want to hate agile, but as far as I can see so long as it encourages people not to plan their software then it is at best counter productive and at worst dangerous. | |
| May 22, 2011 at 9:52 | comment | added | Marjan Venema | +1 very interested in how people solve this in a pragmatic way that lets you take advante of the best both waterfall and agile have to offer. By the way: agile does not equal "no design", but design does tend to be the first victim in the relentless cycle of sprints... | |
| May 22, 2011 at 9:48 | comment | added | user7043 | The first paragraph sounds like a rant against agile. The rest still somewhat sounds like a rant, only against the rest of your team. You may want to paraphrase. | |
| May 22, 2011 at 9:26 | history | asked | user23157 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |