October 20, 2020

Agilists

News for Agilists

Let’s face it: “Agile” is a cursed name | by Romario Eichlig | Serious Scrum | Aug, 2020


Let’s do a quick scientific experiment together. You are in an art gallery and a vase is sitting on a pedestal in the middle of the room. A visitor, fascinated by it, approaches to take a picture — unaware of a second vase right behind him.

That vase immediately falls and breaks into a hundred. (Just like the man’s heart as he thinks of its price.) Now how would you describe this artsy tragedy?

A Stanford professor carried this same study with both English and Spanish native speakers, revealing a shocking pattern. The English described the scene with agentive expressions, such as “the man broke it”. The Spanish disagreed and said something awkward to English ears: “the vase broke itself.”

But what’s shocking in that? Wel…

The Spanish couldn’t remember who broke the vase.

A chart from the study showing how speakers differed

Another study revealed that Germans described a bridge as “elegant and fragile”, although the Spanish labelled it “strong and sturdy”. The secret is also in linguistics: while “die Brücke” is feminine, “el puente” is masculine — so their opinions weren’t based in reality itself but on grammatical gender.

I know this sounds Newspeak-sy at first, but Linguistic Relativity shows that how you label things inescapably bestows power upon it — and that brings about assumptions that distort reality. That’s how a singular object can be both “fragile” and “sturdy” at the same time, regardless of how illogical that is.

But does that have to do with Scrum, you may ask? Well, think of all those common Scrum anecdotes you’ve heard, like “sprints made our team miserable”. Remember agilists saying that “you must track velocity to make it work” and other recurring nonsense. What is common in all those issues?

An unreasonable concern with agility. Scrum teams will pursue sprints as if their lives depended on it. Inexperienced agilists will forget value in favour of burn-down charts, trying to rebuild the world every two weeks. Abusive managers will exploit workers since they are “not agile yet”.

It’s inevitable. Just like turning “ceremonies” into “events” lightens the atmosphere, mentioning “Agile” immediately hastens it. That’s why I say:

“AGILE” is one hell of a cursed name.

I’m sure you’ve heard similar stories before

The Agile Manifesto has 68 words but “speed” isn’t one of those. I also dared to ctrl+f my Scrum Guide for terms such as “velocity”, “fast”, and “quick” but couldn’t find those.

Here’s what I found in seconds though: “working software is the primary measure of progress”. And yes, the Manifesto does mention a “preference to the shorter timescale”, but that is about avoiding extensive plans — not about whipping your developers. Also, here’s what isn’t a preference: “our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software, built around motivated individuals.

An agile team is not one that moves tasks from Sprint Backlog to Done quickly, but one that delivers value often. And to make sure no one falls into the trap of our plagued name, the Scrum Guide dares to make it clearer:

“The heart of Scrum is a Sprint (so) each Sprint has a goal of what is to be built (and) the resultant increment.”

So here we have one goal planned to fit within a Sprint. (So it must also be within the team’s output capacity, right?) Since meeting such goal “is our highest priority”, we can assume that velocity is absolutely irrelevant as long as we have a “working software” by the end of the Sprint.

This means Sprints are meant to deliver continuous value, not burn-down charts, so the velocity hysteria is flawed from birth. Fast teams are cultivated and earned, not reaped and plucked.



Source link