This part and the first part are great. I don't understand half of the comments below where people take it so personally. Keep up the great work! The repeat of "I just want to run an agile project" is exactly what goes through the mind of the project manager as he is constantly confronted with these delays and workarounds.
Don't take it too personally. As with most things in life, both Waterfall or traditional and Agile have good and bad features. A lot of companies use a sort of Hybrid approach. There are good characteristics of both methodologies, one can learn from each one and adapt it, nothing is written in stone.
Also, the videos are good because they help clarify what Agile is and isn't. The misconception that Agile is sort of like a miracle and always cheaper is shown. Also, the issue (especially true if you subcontract a project to an external company or consultants) that you end up paying more for changes is shown. That is why the "Agile guy" on the video is about to loose his job.:)
The videos are well explained. Agile is already there, but it shall keep the same popularity of forgotten or unpopular management or project techniques. Projects that gave birth to Agile never understood how waterfall project lifecycles "should work" and that the long list of project failures are the result of poor project management and stakeholder relations.
You mean you are going to create a happier LifeTime Value customer relationship that is worth exponential revenue to the company over a single effort margin focused project? A project that is delivered faster, but is smaller that what we intend to gouge them for so that we can hit our quarterly projections? Who care if it doesn't work. All those change requests add up you know...who cares if the project is never finished, it's about creating a hostage annuity.
Hi guys...are these videos ment to ridicule the classical way of SW dev vs the (not so) new kid on the block AGILE? I don't know...but I find myself sidelining with all the red tape guys! I mean, in both videos, Luke just wants to run an agile project for which he doesn't even have a clear idea of how its arch will look like, is not bothered that the client (who is *the* major stakeholder on everything he does) does get all he wants, but instead gets "waves" of features and cannot present a clear picture of how his project will start how it will run (well - agile-y) and what end game will there be. In experience, Agile has a lot of flaws and everytime time Agile came up, it was either that the guys were too lazy to stick to real engineering processes or it happened that while the SW worked, it worked from the SW dev point of view (no bugs, all sprints completed with flying colours) but it didnt really produce any added value for the client (which in that case was me). So, I've learnt my lesson - steer clear of Agile.
All this guy wants to do is run an agile project, he doesn't care about making something for the client. The question is not do you want to be agile? the question is do you want to make money? dont forget that part. next you ask your self, can we use the agile process for any part of this project? if so lets identify those parts when we are planning ahead of time. This will cut down on the amount of planning, because agile is very good at cutting down on the planning. But if all you do is run an agile project, that means you are not planning anything out. 100% agile is not the way to go. maybe 40% agile or 70% agile, it really comes down to what actual product your making and what market your in, none of which this video addresses, which seems kind of vital to me.
Bruce Nitroxpro So Agile is basically just building and spending based on faith and experience alone? You say lets make a car and that's literally the only planning you do? you immediately head to the toolbox and materials and start building?
The 'same old way' is not fixed cost on known return either. Invariably, there is some mistake that's been made in the spec, once the user sees the result of the development, they are going to learn more about what they want and require changes and be less happy with the results they paid for, which was essentially wasted time.
The video is about a project manager that want to change the exisiting development process to an Agile approuch within a organization and what challenges he/she may encounter (like a boss that doesn't see the concept). So it's not a complete "how do you do Agile" step by step guide. Agile has a general process (backlogs, grooming, sprints, daily standups, demo and review) but how you implement these is all up to you. When you start a project you don't just go ahead and develop it from thin air, you need to know what to make and if you are the right organization to do it. So before starting development or taking the project on you and the client have meetings to define the project, business goals, market and what the application needs to be able to do (big lines, abstract). This way you and the client are making the init backlog for the project. Then you focus on the top layer (highest prio) of the backlog and break the user stories in more small pieces to be able to make enough documentation and resources to begin itterative development. Every itteration you speak with the client and update the backlog with new stories, editing/removing stories or changing priorities. So because you develop in itterations it's more manageble, cost effecient (for the client and organization it self), agile (the client can change their plan depending on the market changes in each itteration). And most important, the client has an working product at the end of each itteration which has the things he really wants (and not something that is documented at the start of the project 1 year ago).
I was hired to make burgers once, when they asked me to do some cleaning i said, but you hired me to make burgers? This guy who only wants to run agile projects needs to be more agile himself.
In what universe this video it's educative and informative when it sounds like it's from/for people with brain damage? "I want to run a agile project" do we really need to hear that 100 times a minute?
NO chance. Those of us who helped bring AGILE to the forefront clearly understand how and why Waterfall fits certain project types but not all, and visa versa. It is you who fail to grasp that AGILE is the way that biological neurology works. Waterfall is a linear, not geometric solution borne of the industrial age. Agile is how PEOPLE think and act. Bruce Lee : Take what works for you, discard what does not, create something that is truly your own. AGILE/LEAN is about BEING not doing.
Just freaking fire that guy, he is not about agile at all, you cant tell a stakeholder that he should not expect certain things, its like going to a mechanical shop to change breaks on your car and mechanic tells you that we don't know what the outcome will be. For any stakeholder there are two main things, effort and expectations. Effort = Money that he/she puts into the project and Expectation = Final result on how he wants to see it. This cartoon does not show true Agile, on a scale of 0-10 I give 7 for artistic abilities and annoying guy, and 3 for presenting what Agile is.
This part and the first part are great. I don't understand half of the comments below where people take it so personally. Keep up the great work!
The repeat of "I just want to run an agile project" is exactly what goes through the mind of the project manager as he is constantly confronted with these delays and workarounds.
"Luke, I AM YOUR FATHER"......Luke: But I WANT TO RUN AN AGILE PROJECT!!!!!
both parts are great and do release more.. this is so real life
Don't take it too personally. As with most things in life, both Waterfall or traditional and Agile have good and bad features. A lot of companies use a sort of Hybrid approach. There are good characteristics of both methodologies, one can learn from each one and adapt it, nothing is written in stone.
@Nondescript, it is a satire, but, it contains real life situations that some of us may encounter during a project.
Also, the videos are good because they help clarify what Agile is and isn't. The misconception that Agile is sort of like a miracle and always cheaper is shown. Also, the issue (especially true if you subcontract a project to an external company or consultants) that you end up paying more for changes is shown. That is why the "Agile guy" on the video is about to loose his job.:)
+ahpitre Yes, I noticed he not only is to lose THIS job, but lost the old one, too. He should have been more agile in his thinking!
Hi, Can i a do a cover version of this at my workplace?
The videos are well explained. Agile is already there, but it shall keep the same popularity of forgotten or unpopular management or project techniques. Projects that gave birth to Agile never understood how waterfall project lifecycles "should work" and that the long list of project failures are the result of poor project management and stakeholder relations.
Brilliant! And so true
He's harassing everyone with "I want to run an agile project"
That's kind of the point
60 "i want to run an agile project"
The reality is actually the caricature of this thing
You mean you are going to create a happier LifeTime Value customer relationship that is worth exponential revenue to the company over a single effort margin focused project? A project that is delivered faster, but is smaller that what we intend to gouge them for so that we can hit our quarterly projections? Who care if it doesn't work. All those change requests add up you know...who cares if the project is never finished, it's about creating a hostage annuity.
Hi guys...are these videos ment to ridicule the classical way of SW dev vs the (not so) new kid on the block AGILE? I don't know...but I find myself sidelining with all the red tape guys! I mean, in both videos, Luke just wants to run an agile project for which he doesn't even have a clear idea of how its arch will look like, is not bothered that the client (who is *the* major stakeholder on everything he does) does get all he wants, but instead gets "waves" of features and cannot present a clear picture of how his project will start how it will run (well - agile-y) and what end game will there be. In experience, Agile has a lot of flaws and everytime time Agile came up, it was either that the guys were too lazy to stick to real engineering processes or it happened that while the SW worked, it worked from the SW dev point of view (no bugs, all sprints completed with flying colours) but it didnt really produce any added value for the client (which in that case was me). So, I've learnt my lesson - steer clear of Agile.
Sounds like the old Irish curse, "May you get what you wish for." (poor english, but it must have been part of the curse)
"But...I want to run an agile project."
what is it, you gain by sealing this technic , it seems your are trying to shov it in good luck
Your post might make more sense if you actually typed it coherently.
All this guy wants to do is run an agile project, he doesn't care about making something for the client.
The question is not do you want to be agile? the question is do you want to make money? dont forget that part. next you ask your self, can we use the agile process for any part of this project? if so lets identify those parts when we are planning ahead of time. This will cut down on the amount of planning, because agile is very good at cutting down on the planning.
But if all you do is run an agile project, that means you are not planning anything out.
100% agile is not the way to go. maybe 40% agile or 70% agile, it really comes down to what actual product your making and what market your in, none of which this video addresses, which seems kind of vital to me.
I'm awfully sorry, but you just don't get it... AGILE is NOT the same old way of doing business. It's not AGILE if it's a fixed cost on known return.
Bruce Nitroxpro So Agile is basically just building and spending based on faith and experience alone? You say lets make a car and that's literally the only planning you do? you immediately head to the toolbox and materials and start building?
The 'same old way' is not fixed cost on known return either. Invariably, there is some mistake that's been made in the spec, once the user sees the result of the development, they are going to learn more about what they want and require changes and be less happy with the results they paid for, which was essentially wasted time.
The video is about a project manager that want to change the exisiting development process to an Agile approuch within a organization and what challenges he/she may encounter (like a boss that doesn't see the concept). So it's not a complete "how do you do Agile" step by step guide.
Agile has a general process (backlogs, grooming, sprints, daily standups, demo and review) but how you implement these is all up to you. When you start a project you don't just go ahead and develop it from thin air, you need to know what to make and if you are the right organization to do it.
So before starting development or taking the project on you and the client have meetings to define the project, business goals, market and what the application needs to be able to do (big lines, abstract). This way you and the client are making the init backlog for the project. Then you focus on the top layer (highest prio) of the backlog and break the user stories in more small pieces to be able to make enough documentation and resources to begin itterative development. Every itteration you speak with the client and update the backlog with new stories, editing/removing stories or changing priorities.
So because you develop in itterations it's more manageble, cost effecient (for the client and organization it self), agile (the client can change their plan depending on the market changes in each itteration). And most important, the client has an working product at the end of each itteration which has the things he really wants (and not something that is documented at the start of the project 1 year ago).
IT is so difficult for some to understand... So don't even mention Agile Project Management with it!
Is this a satire? I hope it isn't meant to seriously reflect anything resembling reality?
+Nondescript this is totally reality where I work
Ha! This always makes me laugh.
"i want to run an agile project"
I was hired to make burgers once, when they asked me to do some cleaning i said, but you hired me to make burgers?
This guy who only wants to run agile projects needs to be more agile himself.
In what universe this video it's educative and informative when it sounds like it's from/for people with brain damage? "I want to run a agile project" do we really need to hear that 100 times a minute?
NO chance. Those of us who helped bring AGILE to the forefront clearly understand how and why Waterfall fits certain project types but not all, and visa versa. It is you who fail to grasp that AGILE is the way that biological neurology works. Waterfall is a linear, not geometric solution borne of the industrial age. Agile is how PEOPLE think and act. Bruce Lee : Take what works for you, discard what does not, create something that is truly your own. AGILE/LEAN is about BEING not doing.
Just freaking fire that guy, he is not about agile at all, you cant tell a stakeholder that he should not expect certain things, its like going to a mechanical shop to change breaks on your car and mechanic tells you that we don't know what the outcome will be. For any stakeholder there are two main things, effort and expectations. Effort = Money that he/she puts into the project and Expectation = Final result on how he wants to see it. This cartoon does not show true Agile, on a scale of 0-10 I give 7 for artistic abilities and annoying guy, and 3 for presenting what Agile is.