Who cares if agile is dead?

The debate about whether Agile is dead or not is nothing new. A simple search brings up articles like this one, this one and this one from our friends at Merapar. Personally, I have always been a huge proponent of the Agile mindset versus waterfall-style project management. At the same time, I see the struggles that teams, departments, and companies face in truly applying it well. The consequences? Unpredictability, friction, lack of future vision (or is that a consequence?), and inefficiency. However, there is one argument that seems to be missing from most discussions, and that is the focus of this blog.

The world before agile

Agile emerged as a counter-reaction to a multitude of failed IT projects, projects that were approached as long, serial processes. I’m old enough to remember, but younger readers might not remember this. A brief look back might be in order.

Before agile, projects were big and difficult to steer. (Photo by Kelly from Pexels: link)

These processes started with determining the requirements. Then designs were made, both functional and technical. Often, these were lengthy documents attempting to describe as precisely as possible what the system should look like and how it should behave. Then it was time to build according to the specifications. Too much room for personal interpretation was quickly seen as a problem or poor design. Testing often only occurred when a module or even the entire application was complete. After that came acceptance, deployment, and once the project was finished, it entered a maintenance mode. The main problem with this way of working was its rigidity. There was little room for progressive insight. Once underway, it was challenging to steer a project in a different direction.

The promise of agile

Agile came as a godsend, especially for developers and testers. The promise of flexibility, more building and less documenting (“working software over comprehensive documentation”), was welcomed with open arms in many places. The fact that enviable companies like Spotify actively promoted this way of working contributed to the rapid adoption of this style. In many places, this worked much better than what we had before.

Adopting the agile mindset, teams could become nimble and fast like a speedboat. (Photo by iSAW Company from Pexels: link)

Soon we began seeing the downsides. The management layer of a company also likes to be somewhat predictable so that planning and forecasting are possible. Collaboration between teams becomes more complicated when dependencies are no longer worked out and agreed upon in advance. Building a completely self-sufficient team proves quite tricky when it means having one person from every discipline in your team. And the promise of T-shaped professionals, which HR and management seem to desire most, is difficult to fulfill in practice.

Frameworks like SAFe attempt to offer a solution to these problems. They bring more structure to restore predictability in the longer term (usually a quarter), manage dependencies, and better align business and development. Like many methods and techniques, there are both haters and lovers, and this solution also has its pros and cons.

The word agile is derived from agility, nimbleness. Often, this agility is expressed as the need to move with the business. From the history of waterfall projects, a logical need. However, many organizations now seem to express the opposite need: more predictability, plannability, and oversight. In some ways, business actually struggles to be this agile.  The need to respond to market demand every two weeks or month simply does not exist in many companies. In many cases, the business is quite predictable. Long-term plans are in place and the rest of the company cannot cope well with development teams that pivot in any direction at any moment.

So, is Agile dead then?

Whether or when Agile is dead or not, who can say? But I don’t really care. There will undoubtedly be a new way of working which will impresses everyone. Times change and so does our work and thereby way of working. Whatever successor, it won’t be a one-size-fits-all solution. There are simply too many different organizations with different goals, cultures, and therefore different ways of working. Frameworks like Scrum and SAFe are pragmatic in that sense; both explicitly state that you don’t have to apply them dogmatically but should feel free to use them in a way that works for you.

Agile itself was never meant to be a method or prescription. It is a mindset. The mindset to be nimble. It requires people to be open to small, continuous changes. It requires an open working environment where problems are discussed instead of ignored. Where the way of  working is being continuously reviewed to find out what works most efficiently and effectively, while simultaneously acknowledging that the ideal solution does not exist. An environment which fosters trial and error as part of the process. Where people listen to each other and jointly discover a shared path to the future. This mindset is one that can truly help organizations move forward but is also difficult to achieve and, in some cases, will prove unfeasible.

Agile itself was never meant to be a method or prescription. It is a mindset.

Therefore, in my opinion, the Agile mindset is far from dead. Even if the term Agile were to fall out of use and be replaced by something new, that change itself would show that we are all more agile than we might think.