Scrum, XP, Management and the Ethics of Agile Software Development
 

Catastrophic mistakes

Untitled by LucKyL - WahoO from flickrConstrux has a white paper revisiting Stephen McConnell’s Software Development’s Classic Mistakes.

In it, they list ten mistakes most likely to produce catastrophic or serious consequences.

Half of them speak more to executive and product management than development:

  • #1 unrealistic expectations
  • #2 weak personnel
  • #4 wishful thinking
  • #7 lack of sponsorship
  • #10 lack of user involvement

Given my experience of organizations that means projects are marked for failure well before agile methods are even applied.

Under these circumstances, we can hope frequent delivery will either morph the project into something more valuable or cause it to die a quick and merciful death.

A better answer disperses transparency, collaboration and continuous improvement from the team room out to sponsors, stakeholders, support units, suppliers, customers and end users — from development and project management to economies.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

Fail fast

Panic Button by aperte on flickrFail fast is a technique for improving the quality of software:

“failing immediately and visibly” sounds like it would make your software more fragile, but it actually makes it more robust. Bugs are easier to find and fix, so fewer go into production. – Jim Shore

Scrum aspires to a fail fast approach to building software.

It describes practices that surface problems:

  • a backlog prioritized by the product owner and estimated by the team (accountability)
  • short iterations
  • frequent retrospection
  • a role dedicated to removing impediments

It champions values that motivate individuals to address problems:

  • delivering business value
  • collaborating with customers
  • empowering teams
  • building quality in
  • continuous improvement
  • courage and honesty (a refusal to hide risk)

Possessing these values and practices, an organization is less likely to overlook or tolerate dysfunction when it materially affects the setting and achieving of project goals.

  1. risks are identified before they become problems
  2. simple problems are detected and resolved quickly
  3. thorny problems are mitigated
  4. catastrophic problems are aired to all concerned parties (informed consent)

Cases #1-3 increase a project’s chance of creating value.

Case #4 compels an organization to cancel a doomed project.

All four cases represent a better outcome for the business. Assuming that business offers value to the world, that’s better for our end users, our reputation, and our society.

Immediate and visible failure. Much preferable to hidden, prolonged and inevitable failure.

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]
ken h. judySoftware Executive Mgr, developer, father and husband trying to do more good than harm.
CSPIEEE CSDP

Papers

Presentations

 

 

Site menu:


Blogroll

Colleague

Family

Me

Meta

tallman by miya judy

What I'm Doing...

  • "He’s an Arab." "No mam, he's not. He’s a decent family man — citizen" As a response 60% less hate enflaming but - at best - 5% less racist. 5 hrs ago
  • To PA for the weekend. Past the unnervingly competitive sport that is ny penn st boarding and lucky to be sitting together. 6 hrs ago
  • New blog post: Mixed message http://tinyurl.com/3tn6qe 19 hrs ago
  • His followers should boo him. You can't inspire people to hatred and then tell them to be "respectful". 20 hrs ago
  • McCain, you can't just tell your followers to be "respectful", you've got to moderate Palin's "he's not one of us" ack-ack. 20 hrs ago
  • More updates...

Posting tweet...

Powered by Twitter Tools.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - Noncommercial - Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
Copyright © 2006-2008
Ken H. Judy.
This is a personal weblog. Views expressed are my own and not my employer.