Re: Adoption Versus Transformation

Hi Ron,


On 10/10/15, 8:20 AM, Ron Jeffries [email protected] 
[SCRUMDEVELOPMENT] wrote:
> Michael,
>
>> On Oct 10, 2015, at 7:40 AM, Michael Wollin [email protected] [SCRUMDEVELOPMENT]<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>
>> I you were to make one slide for the C-suite to explain why we use the term "agile transformation," what would it be?
>
> It would say, in big bleeding red letters:
>
> DO NOT UNDERTAKE AN “AGILE TRANSORMATION”.
> NOT NOW, NOT EVER, NEVER.
>
> I do not think an “Agile transformation” is something that should be undertaken by an organization until they have a number of successful ordinary Agile projects running. If they have those, they won’t be asking for an “Agile transformation” and they’ll almost certainly know what they should do rather than “roll out Agile".
>
> Regards,
>
> Ron Jeffries
> ronjeffries.com<http://ronjeffries.com/>
> If it is more than you need, it is waste. -- Andy Seidl
>
>


   Thanks for the wise words!

   I'd like to elaborate a little. I've found clarity on this in 2 
places recently:

1. The Scrum Alliance interview with Roger Martin where he contrasts the 
analytical and the intuitive mind in Design Thinking
https://goto.webcasts.com/viewer/event.jsp?ei=1076279


2. Kuhn's book "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" on how progress is 
non-linear. I like this passage that is not from his book but from a 
summary of it at
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/aug/19/thomas-kuhn-structure-scientific-revolutions

"But what really set the cat among the philosophical pigeons was one 
implication of Kuhn's account of the process of paradigm change. He 
argued that competing paradigms are "incommensurable": that is to say, 
there exists no objective way of assessing their relative merits. 
There's no way, for example, that one could make a checklist comparing 
the merits of Newtonian mechanics (which applies to snooker balls and 
planets but not to anything that goes on inside the atom) and quantum 
mechanics (which deals with what happens at the sub-atomic level). But 
if rival paradigms are really incommensurable, then doesn't that imply 
that scientific revolutions must be based – at least in part – on 
irrational grounds? In which case, are not the paradigm shifts that we 
celebrate as great intellectual breakthroughs merely the result of 
outbreaks of mob psychology?
"

   - njv


-- 
............................................
Agile hardware? Yes! Agile safety-critical Embedded Systems too

Nancy Van Schooenderwoert, Lean-Agile Partners Inc.

US mobile: 781 301 1822      [email protected]
Twitter: @vanschoo           http://www.leanagilepartners.com
............................................


------------------------------------
Posted by: Nancy Van Schooenderwoert <[email protected]>
------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to:   [email protected]
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [email protected]