[AM] Re: [AM] Process Components was Re: [AM] ZZA1 =?

Paul,

Please pardon this very delayed response, I am continuously behind this
list.

I also really like your Process Components explanation.  It gives visibility
to a number of methodology issues and opens them for discussion.  One issue
is certainly the proportions between the three components (e.g. how much is
discretionary?).  Is this service or trademarked, or is it available for
ab-use. :-)

Agility as it has been described in this list strongly suggests some things
a process should (or shouldn't) have as part of it's defined component.  It
also suggests a proportioning between the components to reduce hysteresis
(reluctance to change the process -- if it isn't working).

Thanks for the enlightenment.

Rick Fisher

----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Oldfield" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 6:56 AM
Subject: [AM] RE: [AM] RE: [AM] Re: [AM] ZZA1 ³ù


> (responding to Graham)
>
> I hope you don't mind me responding to your posting
> to Steve.
>
> > Here may lie a fundamental split in the Agile community -
> > and it is part of what I am trying to get at in my ongoing
> > essay
> >
> > I believe Agility is a characteristic of a project, to do with
> > being flexible about requirements, changing design
> > structures, proceeding iteratively and learning from each
> > iteration.
>
> Try "Agility is a characteristic of a project, to do with being
> flexible".  It's closer to the mark.
>
> > You are in effect proposing Agility is a characteristic of the
> > methodologist advising the project, being free to change
> > his/her mind about the best practices that are appropriate.
> > By this definition, the most structured methodology might be
> > considered appropriate for some projects, or most crazily,
> > half way through a project, and this would be considered Agile.
> >
> > I believe the second view is a distortion of what Agile
> > methodologies were originally about, and it is part of what I am
> > railing against. By your definition, Agile becomes everything
> > and nothing.
>
> I agree with Steve's response.  I have a particular set of ways
> of talking about agility for those who want to approach it from
> a process perspective rather than taking a more holistic view.
>
> Let us suppose all projects have 'process', because 'process'
> is whatever is done to produce 'product'.
>
> In any given project, this process can be split into three components
> for the purpose of discussion; a Defined component, an Agreed
> component and a Discretionary component.
>
> They are distinguished as follows:
>
> The Defined component is composed of those elements of
> process that are usually written down, and are 'mandatory' for
> the project.  We admit to the possibility of redefining during
> the project, givint a new set of mandatory process elements.
>
> The Agreed component is more nebulous and more mutable,
> and consists of rules agreed by the team about process,
> that by general agreement all team members should follow.
>
> The Discretionary component is everything else that an
> individual needs to do to produce the product.
>
> Each of these components has its role in an overall
> process.  The Defined component is there to give a stable
> structure to the overall process.  The Agreed component
> is there to give co-ordination between members of the team
> so they do not distupt each other more than is necessary,
> but combine collaboratively.  The Discretionary component
> is there to give the flexibility that enables the process to fit
> to the product.
>
> The amount of each of these three components of process
> that is appropriate in a given situation will depend on many
> factors, but in general an agile approach would tend to
> minimise the Defined and maximise the Discretionary.
>
> Clearly, any Discretionary component is ultimately changeable,
> it can be decided on the spot by the person about to enact
> that bit of process.  Agreed and Defined process are
> less changeable.  Yet discretionary process is highly
> dependent on the ability of the individual, and it is possible
> to give individuals too much discretion for their ability.
>
> Once you understand this picture of process, the idea of
> some uber-methodologist is clearly not appropriate to
> agile projects; he could only work on Defined process
> and participate in Agreed process, but we have reduced
> Defined process to a minimum.  The area that is maximised
> is the Discretionary process, in effect each individual
> becomes a mini-methodologist for his own personal
> process.
>
>
> Paul Oldfield
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> www.aptprocess.com
>
> any opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of
> Mentors of Cally or the Appropriate Process Movement
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> For more information about AM, visit the Agile Modeling Home Page at
www.agilemodeling.com
>

For more information about AM, visit the Agile Modeling Home Page at www.agilemodeling.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrKDA.bWnbtk.Z2NtYS1h
Or send an email to: [email protected]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------