tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10280668.post3987926405137341269..comments2023-09-22T06:05:17.495-05:00Comments on Brad Appleton's ACME Blog: The Agility Cycle - Part 1Brad Appletonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15136106921504315995noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10280668.post-41920717367049590622010-06-01T05:09:10.632-05:002010-06-01T05:09:10.632-05:00Hi Ali!
I think being agile implies being adaptive...Hi Ali!<br />I think being agile implies being adaptive (and "inspect and adapt" is a well known mantra of the agile method known as "Scrum"). So in my mind you can't be agile without being adaptive. Being adaptive is one of the necessary <a href="http://blog.bradapp.net/2009/05/five-traits-of-agile-projects.html" rel="nofollow">traits of an agile project.</a>Brad Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15136106921504315995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10280668.post-69343295104949629042010-01-05T05:12:04.597-06:002010-01-05T05:12:04.597-06:00Hi Brad,
This is an interesting post. At least it ...Hi Brad,<br />This is an interesting post. At least it takes out the ambiguity of using different terminology for the same thing.<br /><br />I have a question: do you think agility is enough, or that it should be followed by adaptability? Being agile without adapting may be not enough. Have you done any work on this issue?<br />Thanks and bear with me asking more than one questionali ananihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17948497521950629086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10280668.post-36817713224777879572009-06-30T08:37:18.556-05:002009-06-30T08:37:18.556-05:00Hi Ryan! Thanks for chiming in. Your observation i...Hi Ryan! Thanks for chiming in. Your observation is similar to one I made in <a href="http://blog.bradapp.net/2009/04/agility-cycle-part-3.html" rel="nofollow">part 3 of my series on the agility cycle</a>.<br /><br />I think the word choice in business-agility cycle places a bit more emphasis on communication and responsiveness to change/feedback.<br /><br />It's interesting to note that business/organizational agility (which pre-dates the agile manifesto) evolved directly from the likes of Deming and work of others, work on Learning organizations (Senge), and work on leading organizational change (e.g. Connor, Kotter, etc.).<br /><br />Those are some of the same roots as Lean, and Lean has apparently evolved/matured more (or at least become more popular/trendy).<br /><br />That's enough to beg the question of whether or not there really is any effective difference between Lean and Business-Agility, or if the former is just the latter put into practice.Brad Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15136106921504315995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10280668.post-13491707109410331492009-06-30T05:29:57.510-05:002009-06-30T05:29:57.510-05:00Hi Brad,
I think the Business Agility cycle is as ...Hi Brad,<br />I think the Business Agility cycle is as simple as:<br /><br />1. Plan<br />2. Do<br />3. Study <br />4. Act<br /><br />All others are consultants' takeoffs of this classic Deming process. Its got a long track record of success.<br /><br />This cycle should be done within the context of a set of clearly defined principles. Such as:<br /><br />1. Maximize Stakeholder Value<br />2. Clearly Define Desired Results<br />3. Deliver Value Early and Often<br />4. Pay for Performance (No Cure, No Pay Contracts)<br />5. Respect for People<br /><br />Agile, and I suspect your Agility Cycle, is describing a means to an end, it doesn't include in scope the ends. No?Ryan Shriverhttp://www.theagileengineer.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10280668.post-43344095676506006302009-04-25T08:18:00.000-05:002009-04-25T08:18:00.000-05:00Very interesting comment. I think most of the defi...Very interesting comment. I think most of the definitions say little about "management or no management" because they are focused more on knowledge/learning than on formal authority.<br /><br />I do think that the Gartner cycle, with its clean separation of deciding and communicating and then acting, may strongly suggest (to some at least) that management primarily controls the deciding and communicating, and then involves the "workers" to execute after the decision is made.<br /><br />However, although that could be easily inferred by someone, it need not be the case. It's just hard not to make that assumption when the act of communicating to enage others doesn't occur until after the decision is made.Brad Appletonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15136106921504315995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10280668.post-33944214992225015852009-04-18T17:32:00.000-05:002009-04-18T17:32:00.000-05:00What I like about every one of your examples is th...What I like about every one of your examples is the complete absence of "management or no management."<br />Having attended an AfterBurner seminar, what the Boyd cycle is used to derive a slightly different approach, based on current fighter pilot tactics applied to sales, management, and project management - something suprising results.<br />The absolute ruthless application of discipline in the execution of the project, sales process, or management paradigm.<br />"Flawless Execution" is the title of AfterBurner's approach. Worth a look.<br />Keeping agile is a matter of survival. But doing so means strong discipline, continuous feedback, deep planning, briefing, and debriefing.<br />Keeping the politics of "no managers" out of the discussion moves these approaches into the "actionable" domain.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com