Skip to main content

Back to the agile values

In recent years the term agile has become overused. Many seem to think that if they have have unit tests, standup meetings and burn-down charts, they're agile. All these practices are good, but they don't necessarily make you agile. Even iterations or some kind of certified master don't necessarily make you agile.

So what is agile? If I were to sum it up with one word it would be communication. Communication is everywhere in the agile manifesto:

[We value] individuals and interactions over processes and tools.
I see this as a reaction against processes like RUP that felt like a software development factory where developers were replacable cog wheels. Agile recognizes that it's individuals with intelligence, creativity and drive that make a project succeed.

But individuals are not working in isolation, they need to interact with others. Interactions means communication. Not one-way communication but interactive dialogues. Misunderstandings are inevitable in communication. When you say or write something, it is almost certain that the receiver will misunderstand something. You can't just send someone a document and think they will understand what you mean. You need to verify what they understood, and the best way to do this is in a face to face conversation.

A key part of agile is to have close communication within the team and between the team and the customers.

[We value] working software over comprehensive documentation.
Documentation is a form of communication. Some teams stop writing documents "because that's not agile", but that's a huge misunderstanding. Agile does value documentation, but it values working software more. Working software demonstrates progress better than completing a number of documents, and it demonstrates the team's understanding of the requirements better than a requirements document. But documentation may be useful to explain what you were thinking when you developed the software.

I said that iterations don't necessarily make you agile, but iterations are definitely needed to be agile. Iterations is not a goal in itself, the purpose of iterations is to improve communication with the customers by getting feedback often. It is inevitable that we misunderstand what the customers need. Iterations help us to discover these misunderstandings early, before they get too expensive to fix.

[We value] customer collaboration over contract negotiation.
Collaboration certainly means communication. The development team needs a positive dialogue with the customers, and not just communicate with formal documents.

[We value] responding to change over following a plan.
This may not seem like to be about communication, but actually it is. Where do the changes come from? From the customers. The customers and the team should communicate often, not just up front.

These values are the basis for practices like on-site customer, iterative development and pair programming. It's the values that make you agile, not various practices. The practices vary depending on the size and complexity of the project.


Popular posts from this blog

The Pessimistic Programmer

I decided to change the title of this blog to "The Pessimistic Programmer". Why? Am I a depressed person that thinks nothing will work? No, I am an optimist in life. Something good is going to happen today :-) But in programming, something will surely go wrong.

I don't actually view this as pessimism, but as realism. I want to be prepared for the worst that can possibly happen. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. But my wife explained to me that pessimists always say that they are just being realistic. So, I might as well face it: I am a pessimist.

I think a good programmer needs to be pessimistic; always thinking about what can go wrong and how to prevent it. I don't say that I am a good programmer myself. No, I make far too many mistakes for that. But I have learnt how to manage my mistakes with testing and double checking.

Über-programmers can manage well without being pessimistic. They have total overview of the code and all consequences of changes. But I'…

Database dump with Java

I need to update a database that is created by PHP. The problem is that I am not a PHP coder, but a Java coder, and I need to use some other Java libraries to get the job done. So how can find out exactly which tables to update and how? It would take me weeks to search the PHP code, and I still wouldn't be sure if I got it right.

The first step is to install a clean application on my computer. There is no user data in the database, so if I perform commands like creating a user etc in the web application, I can look at what changed in the database. I'm sure that could be done in MySQL, but I'm not an expert on that either. When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. So, I'll use Java for that to.

So, I wrote a small Java application that produces exactly the output that I need. It reads metadata from the database to find all tables and columns, lists that metadata and the content of all the rows.

Here it is:import;

Writing Better Requirements with Examples and Screen Sketches

We were agile, we had a Scrum master, we had standup-meetings, we had unit tests, we worked iteratively and met the product owner regularly. We did everything right, except the requirements. When we were almost ready to launch, we suddenly understood that we had missed a critical piece of functionality; namely the complex pricing model. The product owner thought we knew how this should work, but we didn't. This was not a feature that could just be patched onto the application in the end, it took several weeks of restructuring. We might blame the product owner for not communicating this clearly, but we were the software professionals. It's our responsibility to find out what our customers want.

Examples What could we have done to avoid this embarrassment? Should we have spent the first month of the project writing requirements? No, I don't think that's the solution. That might have helped, but it would have cost too much.

There is a much simpler thing we could have do…