TITLE: What Agile Isn't AUTHOR: Eugene Wallingford DATE: September 22, 2010 4:38 PM DESC: ----- BODY: Traffic on the XP mailing list has been heavy for the last few weeks, with a lot of "meta" discussion spawned by messages from questioners seeking a firmer understanding of this thing we call "agile software development". I haven't had time to read even a small fraction of the messages, but I do check in occasionally. Often, I'll target in on comments from specific writers whose expertise and experience I value. Other times, I'll follow a sub-sub-plot to see a broader spectrum of ideas. Two recent messages really stood out to me as important signposts in the long-term conversation about agile software development. First, Charlie Poole reminded everyone that Agile Isn't a "Thing".
The ongoing thread about whether is always/sometimes/not always/never/ whatever "right" for a given environment seems to me to be missing something rather important. It seems to be based on the assumption that "agile" is some particular thing that we can talk about unambiguously. It isn't.If you come to the "agile" community looking for one answer to any question, or agreement on specific practices, or a dictum that developers or managers can use to change minds, you'll be disappointed. It's much more nebulous than that:
Agile is a set of values. They fit anywhere that those values are respected, including places where folks are trying to move the company culture away from antithetical values and towards those of agile.If you are working with a group of people who share these values, or who are open to them, then you can "do agile" by looking for ways to bring your group's practices more in alignment with your values. You can accomplish this in almost any environment. But to get specific about agile, Charlie reminds us, you probably have to shift the conversation to specific approaches to agile development, and even specific practices. When I use the term "agile", I try not to use it solo. I like to say "agile software development" or simply "agile development". Software configuration management guru Brad Appleton wrote the second post to catch my eye and goes a step beyond "Agile Isn't a 'Thing'" to the root of the issue: "agile" is an adjective!
"Agile" is something that you are (or are not), not something that you "do".So simple. Thanks, Brad.
I can talk about "agility" as a noun, where it is the quality attained by "being agile". I can talk about "agile" a modifier of a noun/thing, even if the "thing" it is modifying is a set of values, principles, beliefs, behaviors, etc.He doesn't stop there, though, for which I'm glad. You can try to develop software in an agile way -- with an openness to change, typically using short iterations and continuous feedback -- and thus try to be more agile. You can adopt a set of values, but if you don't change what you do then you probably won't be any more agile. I also liked that Brad points out it's not reasonable to expect to realize the promise developing software in an agile way if one ignores the premise of the agile approaches. For example, executing a certain method or set of practices won't enable you to respond to change with facility unless you also take actions that keep the cost of change low and pay attention to whether or not these actions are succeeding. Most importantly, "agile" is not a synonym for happiness or success. "Being agile" may be a way to be happier as a developer or person, but we should not confuse the goal of "being agile" with the goal of being happy or successful or happy. The title of this entry, "What Agile Isn't", ought to sound funny, because it isn't entirely grammatically correct. If we quote the "Agile", at least then we could be honest in indicating that we are talking about a word. Don't worry too much about whether you fit someone else's narrow definition of "agile". Just keep trying to get better by choosing -- deliberately and with care -- actions and practices that will move you in the direction of your goal. The rest will take care of itself. -----