On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Steven Gordon <sgordonphd@...>
wrote:

> Chris,
>
> We have collaborated on an answer to your question about why Six Sigma
> and Lean can provide data on their transitions and "agile" cannot,
> right?


Well, no. I've not seen any collaboration so much as two camps hurling
opposing views back and forth... guilty as charged.

>
>
> If "agile" ever has a definition and an effective way to determine
> which practioneers or efforts comply with that definition, then we
> could indeed collect the same kind of data. Scrum is in a position
> where it could decide to do just that, although one of the
> questionable criteria for Scrum certification would seem to be not
> publicly questioning the validity of the certification.



Should we tread into these waters again? Defining agile and certification is
a touchy subject. I'm one of the (it seems) very few who think that
certification (and it follows that definition is in there as well) is
possible and necessary and it can be done without diluting the practice.
And, in fact, I believe that if you walk into a CIO's office with a) no
data to answer cost and payback of a transition, and b) no definition of
what you are doing, you won't get very far. Perhaps it's been possible, so
far, but to really take it further, up the adoption curve, certification,
standardization, measurement and definition seem necessary.

I'll say it this way (I've said it in different ways before) - it's time for
XP/Agile to step out of the realm of Zen mysticism and into its proper place
as an effective method of reducing the cost of poor quality with respect to
developing software.


>
>
> XP could decide to create a certification process, and then it could
> collect verifiable data. I see no feasible way for "agile" to do this
> mainly because nobody is in a position to define "agile" and enforce a
> certification against that definition. Without that, any data we
> could collect would be meaningless.


Six Sigma certification has nothing to do with the fact that data is shared
regarding transitions. Certification in Six Sigma is about
whetherpractitioners can apply the tools properly, run projects, tailor as
needed, be change leader...


This would still not prevent any individual or group from collecting
> their own data. What this would tell inquiring customers is what they
> could expect if that individual or group lead the effort.


Let's try this: If I had 10,000 companies that had transitioned to agile,
and I could stratify the data by industry, attributes of consulting company
used to run transition, and if I wanted to know how long it took to pay back
the transition costs, or I wanted to know if, after 5 years the company was
still doing agile, then I could find out that stuff using some simple
statistical analysis. I could also use this data to get an idea of how long
my transition might take to pay off, given I can figure out what industry
I'm in and what type of consultant I'm going to use. I may even use this
data to make some educated forecasts about whether agile will stick at my
company.

None of this says 'Yes, you will be 100% successful, or 75% successful'. It
will say '80% of companies in the auto industry spent between $1M and $1.5M
to transition. 50% of Agile programs paid all transition costs after 3
years, 40% after 4 years, and 10% after 5 years.. After 5 years, 60% of
those companies are still using agile, 20% are using some agile techniques,
and 20% have abandoned agile all together.'

Now, imagine I, as a CIO had that information at available to me! I could
use that information to support a decision in the context of my own
business. Perhaps 3 years is too long to realize returns, or maybe it's
about right and I'm willing to live with the risk of going longer than 3
years. Or maybe I'm not willing to live with that risk - perhaps 3 years is
way too long to get my 1.5M back, and maybe it's about right. Maybe $1M is
about right, but I can't risk seeing my entire investment dissolve after 5
years.

Providing this type of information just seems more responsible than the
alternative. Not every company wants to invest in pilot projects to see if
agile works for them.

Now, given this, is it really outside the realm of possibility that we could
start figuring this out?

Chris.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]