Reply to post: Re: wagile

So you're 'agile', huh? I do not think it means what you think it means

Andy 73 Silver badge

Re: wagile

@yoganmahew I'll take that as tongue in cheek :)

It is worth questioning some of the value of agile if your client wants one thoroughly tested release per year and the nature of the testing is not open to change. That doesn't mean you can't adopt it internally, but some of the reassurance of continuously tested increments are lost. That means ultimately your product still suffers from some of the biggest issues with waterfall, regardless of how agile you are.

That impedance mismatch can lead to developers and project managers coming away from a project thinking agile is a failure because it failed to deliver in hostile conditions. I've worked with people who claimed to be working in a 'post agile' way, because they'd tried and failed to get agile to work for them. It took them over two years to deliver a six month product change, but they'd never under any circumstances 'go back to agile'.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon