I shared this on all networks as it was a good read, but just now thought I should perhaps comment here and say just that: good read! Thanks! :)
I think it can turn really dangerous still, when agencies “do agile” in what in all reality actually is based on Waterfall, thus creating a “scrummyfall” or “watile”, which to the project team mainly can be likened with waterboarding, where they end up with the drawbacks of two opposite methodologies and the benefits if neither.
As so correctly pointed out, if there isn’t a client-side product owner it is still very likely to be a rough ride that still can turn into a blame-throwing game. In those cases I usually steer clear of Agile to such a degree I prefer people not saying “scrum” or “agile” in relation to the project, as it will go wrong and the blame will end on their perception of a wrongly executed (and thereby innocent) methodology.
However, properly done agile, with a clued up client and a productive high-performing team is nirvana-ish.
Mathias Hellquist
I shared this on all networks as it was a good read, but just now thought I should perhaps comment here and say just that: good read! Thanks! :)
I think it can turn really dangerous still, when agencies “do agile” in what in all reality actually is based on Waterfall, thus creating a “scrummyfall” or “watile”, which to the project team mainly can be likened with waterboarding, where they end up with the drawbacks of two opposite methodologies and the benefits if neither.
As so correctly pointed out, if there isn’t a client-side product owner it is still very likely to be a rough ride that still can turn into a blame-throwing game. In those cases I usually steer clear of Agile to such a degree I prefer people not saying “scrum” or “agile” in relation to the project, as it will go wrong and the blame will end on their perception of a wrongly executed (and thereby innocent) methodology.
However, properly done agile, with a clued up client and a productive high-performing team is nirvana-ish.