4 ms·

The demotivation poster (we'll ask for estimates, but then treat them as deadlines) really strikes a chord because that is one of my major 'gripes' with the agi

The demotivation poster (we'll ask for estimates, but then treat them as deadlines) really strikes a chord because that is one of my major 'gripes' with the agile planning process. Particularly when a manager is heavily involved in that process. It may be no coincidence that the best projects I have been on are the ones where the manager deliberately stepped out of the room or was not a part of those phases of the planning process. Agile is part of a more disturbing trend I've noticed [0] of companies striving very hard to turn software into a literal sausage-making factory [1] and to make software engineers just another cog in the machine or a replaceable part to fatten the bottom line with a lower salary. This is provably the aim of some of the top companies given news on no-hire agreements. [10]. [0] with Java being the favored "currency" of programming languages being the other disturbing trend-- it's much easier to replace a Java programmer than any other for a reason [1] you know what they say about how sausages are made [10] http://gizmodo.com/apple-guilty-of-price-fixing-730018979 http://gizmodo.com/apple-guilty-of-price-fixing-730018979

wpietri 13y ago
Yeah. 100% agreed. In some ways I don't blame people. Industrial approaches to organizing people provided a major leap forward for humankind. And they work well with primate power dynamics; modern corporate structures are basically feudalism in suits. It's natural that people would just want to take the top-down, command-and-control structures and replicate them in the new thing they're doing. But they just don't work well. They don't even work well for industry anymore; there's a reason that Toyota, which has a very different management philosophy, wiped the floor with the US auto companies, which stayed stuck in the early 20th century. To be fair, Agile started out to be 100% the opposite of that sausage-factory approach. I know a lot of the early players, and they sincerely had a very different vision. It makes me sad to see their work used as just another stick to beat developers. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
jaggederest 13y ago
I think the correct way to do it is to do the old 'pick two' method - quality, features, timeline, pick two. (I'd say you never want low quality but... situationally.)
zimpenfish 13y ago
Always double your estimates because management will cut them in half anyway.

wpietri 13y ago

Yeah. 100% agreed. In some ways I don't blame people. Industrial approaches to organizing people provided a major leap forward for humankind. And they work well with primate power dynamics; modern corporate structures are basically feudalism in suits. It's natural that people would just want to take the top-down, command-and-control structures and replicate them in the new thing they're doing. But they just don't work well. They don't even work well for industry anymore; there's a reason that Toyota, which has a very different management philosophy, wiped the floor with the US auto companies, which stayed stuck in the early 20th century. To be fair, Agile started out to be 100% the opposite of that sausage-factory approach. I know a lot of the early players, and they sincerely had a very different vision. It makes me sad to see their work used as just another stick to beat developers. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

jaggederest 13y ago

I think the correct way to do it is to do the old 'pick two' method - quality, features, timeline, pick two. (I'd say you never want low quality but... situationally.)

zimpenfish 13y ago

Always double your estimates because management will cut them in half anyway.