Agile 2. Adrian Lander

Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Agile 2 - Adrian Lander страница 13

Agile 2 - Adrian Lander

Скачать книгу

think that DevOps is an evolution or outgrowth of Agile. That is not how it was, but it no longer matters. Agile is a set of ideas. DevOps is a set of ideas. Both sets of ideas, and many others, are extremely valuable in the context of product development.

      Earlier we posed the question, do these practices favor certain ways of working at the expense of others so that certain people benefit but others are at a disadvantage?

      The group that authored the four values of the Agile Manifesto was pretty homogeneous. As we said, they were all English speaking, most were from the United States with a few from England and one from the Netherlands, all were men, and all were very experienced. They did not represent a “typical” team of programmers. It is reasonable to expect, therefore, that they had some collective biases that differ from how a typical team of programmers would feel and think.

      Since most were experienced, one might assume that when they wrote that they value “individuals and interactions over processes and tools,” they were thinking of themselves as capable individuals—individuals who are highly experienced and who have refined judgment about IT methods. Such individuals arguably need less oversight—less process.

      Within the principles that some of the group came up with, one of them reads, “The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.”

      That one principle has resulted in a strong preference within the Agile community for “self-organization,” that is, a team in which there is no designated leader. The authors of the Agile Manifesto were able to come up with four values in the course of a weekend, so they clearly were able to self-organize enough to accomplish that. Would they have been able to continue to be organized over a period of months to create a complex software product?

      What happens if you put a group of people together and tell them to “self-organize” to achieve a goal? Well, it depends.

      You will read that phrase, “it depends,” a lot in this book. We believe it is central to all of the issues pertaining to how groups of people should work together. In the words of Malcolm Gladwell, the author of Blink, the only answer that is always right is “it depends,” and that is definitely true when dealing with groups of people.

      Some of the factors affecting how well a group self-organizes are:

       Personalities—some personalities mix well, others less so.

       Level of knowledge and experience—do they know the job well enough to get it done without supervision?

       Urgency—how important is their goal? Do their lives depend on it? Or at the other extreme, is it something that someone else wants—something the team sees as inconsequential to them—and they are mere mercenaries?

       Preparation—have they been trained to work in a certain way so that everyone has predefined roles?

       Proven history—have they worked together before and shown that they can?

      There are certainly other factors as well.

      Some people work well in a group; others have trouble in a group and prefer to have their own task. The Agile community tends to dismiss the value of these “loners” or “lone wolves.” Yet lone wolves have created some of the most impactful software. Linux is an example. It was created by Linus Torvalds, who is a self-proclaimed loner and introvert. Today he still oversees the evolution of Linux, but he does so in a room by himself, communicating with the thousands of Linux kernel developers involved entirely by email. Linux powers most of today's computers, from smartphones to most of the servers in the cloud. If you use Amazon, you use Linux. If you use an Android phone, you use Linux.

      One of the principles in the Agile Manifesto reads, “The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation.”

      An Agile coach or Scrum Master is supposed to facilitate team meetings, but doing so can be challenging. If a few members are talking rapidly, a facilitator might feel that the members are “on a roll” and be hesitant to interfere.

      An introvert—by definition—will find that situation emotionally taxing. Even if asked their opinion, they are not likely to keep the floor long enough to actually convince anyone. It is therefore reasonable to assume that introverts might prefer to first communicate in written form and meet in person only if it is necessary.

      Regardless, there is still a problem, because while Agile appears to favor extroverts, the people at whom Agile methods are mostly targeted—software developers—have a high proportion of introverts, as a group, even though the actual percentage is unclear. Even if, say, 60% of programmers are extroverts—something that would be a counterintuitive career choice—forcing extrovert-favoring methods on the other 40% would be unfair and counterproductive.

      So it is possible that one member of the group influenced the others—a member who seems to fit the profile of an extrovert, based on his high level of involvement in Agile community group initiatives.

Скачать книгу