1
This is a great story, that's all too familiar unfortunately. twitter.com/matteocollina/…
Back to archive
Thread
6 tweets
2
I've had people talk about "agile execution" after stages of design documents, architecture reviews, etc. Well okay, maybe there is such a thing that's a bit more flexible with picking tasks.
3
On the other hand, successful companies like Amazon are known for their "working backwards" process that starts with the big picture, and design documents. And I've seen projects fail because people were not considering how everything is going to fit together.
4
I think the truth is that there is no one size fits all process. You need agile when you need to discover what the customer wants and need to be fast and iterate. That big migration that touches a couple of dozen systems? Maybe it is better to take a step back and make a plan.
5
It also depends a lot on how much coordination between teams you need. I think many companies fail at agile because the teams are not cut in a way that they actually can be very agile but depend on each other very much.
6
But it would definitely help if you stopped mislabelling and calling things which are clearly waterfall-ish what they are and not slap the Agile label on everything.