On 10/25/2017 10:49 AM, mbsoftwaresolutions@mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote:
On 2017-10-25 10:34, Stephen Russell wrote:
Ted, do you desire Agile/Scrum based projects or do you like the waterfall you laid out in the email?
Does ANYBODY do waterfall yet? In this day and age, I figured agile rules the day.
From what I've seen, most companies that say they are doing Agile are actually not doing Agile. In some extremely bad cases I've seen clear Waterfall mentality exhibited "shamelessly" on projects that were trying to use typical Agile approaches (SCRUM, iterations, etc). The results were terrible. They even set up teams that absolutely do not meet the minimum standards of Agile. And that is a very sad thing: people that do not understand software development end up walking away with the wrong impression of what Agile can do.
But Agile is not a silver bullet. If everyone, especially the "funding source", does not understand what Agile really is, and what everyone's responsibility and authority are, you will almost certainly end up with at horrible mess. And if its a "gig for hire" (contract) it can turn into a legal mess. And there are circumstances where Agile absolutely should not be used (strict schedule needs due to integration, requirement sets that cannot be reduced, etc).
It's funny how vendors, corporations, and consultants will not admit they'll do Waterfall. They will label it RUP (Rational Unified Process), or SAFE (can't remember what that expands to - they try to brand it as a form of Agile, but it's definitely not). So Agile has suffered a lot from the usual software industry buzzword-worship. Some companies may actually not want to use it based on their experience.
-Charlie