s***@aol.com
2004-02-10 19:54:13 UTC
The people I was with last week do a fairly good job of developing systems for the state government. It is all COBOL systems run on OS-90s and AS/400s. They clearly cannot pursue an XP approach to development, but were looking at a more process-oriented method to getting their requirements defined better. It’s not that they don’t do good jobs; they are fairly successful across the boards at hitting deadlines, producing quality work and having minimal rework and maintenance problems. What they are after, and sought my help for, was consistency. They wanted to be more confident that, going in to a project, the percentage chance of success would not fall below a certain acceptable level. While, as far as I can see, they have had no spectacular failures or calamities, they still would like to get more consistency in their delivery among all their people.
Is there any other way of doing this except by establishing a process? I worked with them to adopt a “light” process, but one that would establish a floor of confidence below which project quality is not likely to fall.
Here is the real question, and it stems back to the agile dependence on “good” people, and one I hadn’t considered before. Perhaps you’ve discussed it in previous threads. Even the most high-quality of us – the Ron Jeffries and the Scott Amblers and the Paul Oldfields, etc. – are only as good as they feel at the time. We all have down times, allow overwork to mar our judgment and performance, get distracted by personal issues and so on. We are after all, human. We are not consistent.
Business wants consistent performance and may be willing to sacrifice excellence to get it, if getting excellence means there is an equal chance of failure. Business would rather have a steady stream of mediocrity that they can depend on, plan on and predict than even 80% excellence when they are never sure of when the 20% failure will occur, and the excellence as predictable as whether the star agile developer’s team won the big game the night before.
We are all professionals, particularly on this forum, but we also suffer from ups and downs and greater and lesser interest, and occasional burn-out.
Say what you will about process stifling creativity, it does promote constancy, at least in the eyes of the Upper Level Management. Mediocrity is something you can depend on, take to the bank. Everything else is a risk.
So, first question is what kind of Agile process do you suggest to a group who is already quite successful, works in non-agile technologies (COBOL, mainframe) for a highly visible state agency (Child Welfare) with high risk in the area of safety and legality? This is the challenge question.
The bigger question I have is the philosophical one of what agile methods, and especially agile modeling which I classify as more dependent on the daily capacity and attitude of the individual modeler guarantee and maintain a semblance of consistency in the face of exhaustion, hangover, burn-out, strife on the home front, the auto accident on the way to work, death in the family, etc. etc.?
As has been pointed out many times in this forum of “good people”, getting good people is one of the primary tenets of agility, and we’ve discussed it, probably not exhaustively as yet. But how about keeping the “good people” in good health mentally and physically so they can do the miracles that agility promises?
As you know from my sporadic postings from the field (although my field is mostly covered with deep carpets) I am in favor of agility, but trying desperately to close a lot of holes in the approach, so that it can be promulgated faster and farther. What say you?
-steve
For more information about AM, visit the Agile Modeling Home Page at www.agilemodeling.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: gcma-***@gmane.org
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrKDA.bWnbtk.Z2NtYS1h
Or send an email to: agilemodeling-***@topica.com
TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
Is there any other way of doing this except by establishing a process? I worked with them to adopt a “light” process, but one that would establish a floor of confidence below which project quality is not likely to fall.
Here is the real question, and it stems back to the agile dependence on “good” people, and one I hadn’t considered before. Perhaps you’ve discussed it in previous threads. Even the most high-quality of us – the Ron Jeffries and the Scott Amblers and the Paul Oldfields, etc. – are only as good as they feel at the time. We all have down times, allow overwork to mar our judgment and performance, get distracted by personal issues and so on. We are after all, human. We are not consistent.
Business wants consistent performance and may be willing to sacrifice excellence to get it, if getting excellence means there is an equal chance of failure. Business would rather have a steady stream of mediocrity that they can depend on, plan on and predict than even 80% excellence when they are never sure of when the 20% failure will occur, and the excellence as predictable as whether the star agile developer’s team won the big game the night before.
We are all professionals, particularly on this forum, but we also suffer from ups and downs and greater and lesser interest, and occasional burn-out.
Say what you will about process stifling creativity, it does promote constancy, at least in the eyes of the Upper Level Management. Mediocrity is something you can depend on, take to the bank. Everything else is a risk.
So, first question is what kind of Agile process do you suggest to a group who is already quite successful, works in non-agile technologies (COBOL, mainframe) for a highly visible state agency (Child Welfare) with high risk in the area of safety and legality? This is the challenge question.
The bigger question I have is the philosophical one of what agile methods, and especially agile modeling which I classify as more dependent on the daily capacity and attitude of the individual modeler guarantee and maintain a semblance of consistency in the face of exhaustion, hangover, burn-out, strife on the home front, the auto accident on the way to work, death in the family, etc. etc.?
As has been pointed out many times in this forum of “good people”, getting good people is one of the primary tenets of agility, and we’ve discussed it, probably not exhaustively as yet. But how about keeping the “good people” in good health mentally and physically so they can do the miracles that agility promises?
As you know from my sporadic postings from the field (although my field is mostly covered with deep carpets) I am in favor of agility, but trying desperately to close a lot of holes in the approach, so that it can be promulgated faster and farther. What say you?
-steve
For more information about AM, visit the Agile Modeling Home Page at www.agilemodeling.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: gcma-***@gmane.org
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrKDA.bWnbtk.Z2NtYS1h
Or send an email to: agilemodeling-***@topica.com
TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------