Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> One side is signed up for incremental delivery, and one side is set up for a fixed scope and deadline and the result is misery.

This is a brilliant summary, thank you.

The best 'agile' experiences I've had are situations where the 'clients' are directly involved, often within the same organization. Instead of a hard scope or deadline, there's just a shared interest in producing a valuable product efficiently, and the users are on-hand throughout the process for feedback and reevaluation.

The worst experiences have been waterfall contracts, developed by an internal simulation of agile. The software team does frequent "releases" to business or management, who provide feedback and feature requests, but the actual recipients are uninvolved outside of occasional demos, or contacted only indirectly by non-programmers. The result is almost always thrashing, with time and effort spent pointlessly satisfying the forms of agile even though the real timeline and customer feedback are unyielding.



In large enough orgs, internal clients can end up being just as bad as external clients, or even worse since they have a direct line to your PM, can track your feature board, etc. yet there is basically no sense of camaraderie or shared goals.

I'd say generally IME they are still preferable, but occasionally can be more painful.


> waterfall contracts, developed by an internal simulation of agile.

We call this wagile


I just call it agile. It’s the common form.


We call it scrummerfall.


We call it frAgile.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: