Freestyling: Beating Agile, Lean And Plan-driven Hands Down
28. May, 2009 
13 Comments
Last week I got an email asking if I am an Agilist.
Scuze me? I am Dutch. Does that count?
Of course I know about agile approaches. Yes, I know Scrum.
Yes, I know the devastating effects a single minded, too narrow focused, command-and-control fanatic can have on the workplace.
But I also know that you can create a balance between plan-driven and agile approaches.
Image by SuperFantastic.
I also know that humans need to categorize everything just to make sense of the world.
When combining the two statements, it will become obvious that “plan-driven” and “agile” are also some arbitrary concepts created by humans to support the limited mind. There is no natural law defining “agile”, there is no eternal balance putting each of them on the extremes of some kind of scale.
It is just us, making up a context we can understand. You can call it whatever you want. And you can put in anything you like. Or out, if you want.
Brian Marick believes Agile is being dumbed down. So he created Artisanal Retro-Futurism crossed with Team-Scale Anarcho-Syndicalism. Just to be sure no one would take that name and create it into something else.
Paul Ritchie mentions the emergence of “Sim”: “… because this piece is in Forbes, I’ll bet that smart c-level folks will soon be asking their PMOs about whether they are incorporating this approach into their methodologies.”
People!
There is just a problem that needs to be taken care of. There is just a team that must be managed. Just observe the situation and look for the cause. Don’t get caught up in “finding the right method”.
Find the problem. Find the solution.
We don’t need sexy flexi Agilist. We don’t need plan-driven commanders.
We need people that can use any technique, any mindset, any approach at the right time.
We need: Freestylers!
You need to be Freestyling.
We need our own song!
Agile. Plan-driven. Waterfall. Freestyling.
I did it again, didn’t I?
Sorry, i have to strongly disagree: “Find the problem. Find the solution.” You need to take some defined steps to find the solution. That’s called a method. Isn’t it?
ROTFLOL
Bas,
Freestyling is for experts. Beginners need guides.
Agile is a value system. You can’t freestyle around it. Either you share the values, or you don’t.
Agree with Craig. I have seen free styling step out of the exact argument that you present. I have also seen it fail horribly. Mixing and matching anything in life requires thorough understanding of everything you can mix and match in that context.
Expert chefs can freestyle. Normal people need recipes.
@Patrick: “you need to take some defined steps to find the solution. ” – I agree, but this I find lacking in almost all methods, standard, etc. You get the instruction to tailor it to the situation, without the recipe how to do that properly.
@Craig & Akshay: I see your point. So Scrum would be ideal for beginners as it is an easy and short recipe. PMBoK would absolutely disastrous for beginners as it is not a recipe, its an encyclopedia of all the food in existence. Is that your point?
@PEZ: Thanks for the input. Somewhere I don’t completely agree, but I am not sure how and where
… this will come …
I’m with you, Bas! Every project is going to throw up unique problems. It’s important to have an awareness and understanding of different methods and techniques, so that you can select the right tool to deal with the problems in front of you.
But don’t get so wedded to any one technique that you start creating more problems for yourself, instead of solving them! Learn to adapt, and pick and choose what is right for you and your project.
Which is why, in the spirit of freestyling, I’m going to have to opt-out of having that as my song…
Trevor, you are welcome in my sandbox, but the song stays!
… Ragga Microphone…
(at least I think that is what he raps)
The need for structure is a classic trait — a substantial part of our human nature and how we socialize, interact, and team. Structure is also a classic response to failure… problems, issues. When structure fails, what then?
Many people have an ingrained need to know and understand the answer to “how do I do my job.” That’s a “structure question,” for the most part. Some of us need to know that answer in great, trivial, monumental detail. Others in simple high-level terms. There is a great deal of variation from person to person.
People who are learning may have different structure requirements than those with vast experience. How we learn is quite different from how we do for many people. For others, the difference is less acute… perhaps non-existent.
For those who take PMBOK as a “structure” and attempt to apply it as such in a wholesale manner, project failure is almost certain. The same thing can be said of XP, RUP, Agile and many other examples. In some cases this might be the difference between a learner and a doer. In others it may be a more fundamental personality difference — “tree people” and “forest people.”
Agile — and Scrum in particular — is almost wholly dependent for success upon the people involved. Not everyone is a born collaborator, or self-directing team guru, or structural minimalist. These people don’t do well in Agile environments. It remains an open question if training can facilitate that change… the personal change required. Since Agile *is* being “dumbed down” the point may already be moot.
As Bas suggests (with humor and insight), choosing the same tactics over and over regardless of position is foolish. Great latitude is required… creative thinking… astute choices must be made dependent on the people and circumstances at hand.
Take what you have to work with, make the most of it, and improve as needed. Those who adapt to change succeed, as Darwin pointed out decades ago.
People have to balance opposites: control vs. no control. Polarity only leads to one-sided view of the problem and the solutions are lopsided accordingly. Creativity and control are at the opposite ends.
More importtantly is that when we excercise control what do we mean by that? Statistics show that softskills are have the overriding factors over technical skills (67% vs. 33%). Do we claim that we can control human happiness, creativity, trust and other soft skills?
Excessive control works against self-organizing concepts and is creativity-killer. This control will only lead to negative results. Those who advocate control have not measured the opportunity cost of allowing creative ideas to float.
Performance is linked to desirability to go to work and work wholeheartedly. Control again serves in subsidizing desirability.
My ideas are consistent with those ideas of Bas.
I agree with Craig that free styling is for experts not for beginners.
I agree with you completely Bas – freestyling is the way to go, and yes, it requires experts.
What I don’t agree with is anyone who thinks the “but it requires experts” argument is a strong case against the freestyle approach. It’s just a fact.
Tough problems require smart people. Tough projects require experts to lead & execute them. Organizationally, we should definitely prefer to hire experts for this stuff. Free-styling, creative experts who know their stuff and make it look easy. Process and method are a poor replacement for talent.
The alternative is to rely on interchangeable “human resources” with mediocre skills who try to execute a modestly-effective methodology which they may or may not understand.
Damn right it takes an expert. And yeah, experts are rare and expensive, but you don’t need as many of them… and 10 non-experts cost even more and deliver far less.
Of course, for repeatability sake, it’s nice when an expert takes a newbie as an apprentice and passes the baton.
Hi guys,
thanks for the great replies. The more I think about it, i think Dan points it out nicely: these are 2 topics. Freestyling and education.
I hope you check out my suggestion for the eduction part based upon the Scrum Shock Therapy:
http://www.basdebaar.com/shock-therapy-1582.html