The Ubiquitous Language of Agile

Paul Seymour • Dec 14, 2017
It’s interesting to see how mainstream Agile has become in the enterprise vocabulary. At some point when speaking with large enterprise customers, the conversation will invariably turn toward Agile practice. They have Agile Coaches and Certified Scrum Masters galore guiding their Agile journey, and most rate themselves as doing a pretty decent job of following Agile principles. In contrast a lot of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) will tell us that they are struggling to gain traction with Agile – they are trying, but they feel like they have a long way to go and a lot to learn.

Curiously, when you ask an enterprise customer how long it takes from a developer check in until that change reaches the target user, the answers are a little vague. “It depends upon the system, and who you define as the target user…”. Pushing harder, we often find they define their target user as an internal test team or product stakeholder, and a release as a release to an internal environment. Actually progressing working software to reach the final consumer of that software can take many months. SMEs will mostly give a straight answer. “We release to test every two weeks, and after a week of testing we release to production”.

I’d argue that the SMEs are actually a lot better at Agile than they credit themselves, and that some enterprises have missed the point. We all agree that simply using Agile sounding ceremonies and artifacts doesn’t make you Agile. I often hear the joke “yeah, we must be doing Agile because we have a daily stand-up”. However, most enterprises doing iterative development tend to think they are taking Agile seriously if they have sprints or iterations. Iterative development is not simply the process of chunking work up into short, well-defined periods – that’s like defining a boomerang as a stick that you throw. Iterative development must close the loop between the development team and the end user – it’s really about how long it takes you to build something, deliver it to the user, and then collect and incorporate their feedback into the next build / release cycle. If it takes you 3 months to get code from developer to the end user, then your best case cycle time is 6 months. You literally have a 6 month iteration regardless of your development chunks, and that’s definitely not Agile.

Certainly you can argue the benefits of a well structured backlog, estimating, chunking up development work and having showcases. Agile coaches make a living out of teaching enterprises how to do this. But unless you can fix the release process and rapidly release software out to the end user, then you aren’t doing Agile. Nor are you getting the benefits of doing Agile. Showcases will often be smoke and mirrors, and development teams aren’t getting the buzz and excitement of creating software and learning through interaction with real users. Business units are not seeing user feedback incorporated quickly, allowing them to drive innovation and market fit.

So why is there such a discrepancy between how enterprises and SMEs rate their Agile maturity? When you ask an SME where they need help, they are often quite specific: they need help with structuring their user stories, they are struggling with CICD or architecture, they need automated testing or better release quality. Their focus is fundamentally on the speed at which they are solving problems for their customer and they expect Agile to help them improve. Enterprise customers are often focused internally, on project life cycle issues and stakeholder management. They use the language and processes of Agile, but actually taking it all the way through to production is too hard. They aren't doing Agile at all.

Share This Post

Get In Touch

Recent Posts

By Joe Cooney 02 Apr, 2024
Red-team challenges have been a fun activity for PZ team members in the past, so we recently conducted a small challenge at our fortnightly brown-bag session, focusing on the burgeoning topic of prompt injection. Injection vulnerabilities all follow the same basic pattern – un-trusted input is inadvertently treated as executable code, causing the security of the system to be compromised. SQL injection (SQLi) and cross-site scripting (XSS) are probably two of the best-known variants, but other technologies are also susceptible. Does anyone remember XPath injection? As generative models get incorporated into more products, user input can be used to subvert the model. This can lead to the model revealing its system prompt or other trade secrets, reveal information about the model itself which may be commercially valuable, subvert or waste computation resources, perform unintended actions if the model is hooked up to APIs, or cause reputational damage to the company if the model can be coerced into doing amusing or inappropriate things. As an example, entrepreneur and technologist Chris Bakke was recently able to trick a Chevy dealership’s ChatGPT-powered bot into agreeing to sell him a Chevy Tahoe for $1 . Although the U.S. supreme court has yet to rule on the legal validity of a “no takesies backsies” contract (as an employee of X Chris is probably legally obligated to drive a Tesla anyway) it is not hard to imagine a future scenario with steeper financial consequences.
27 Feb, 2024
With the advent of ChatGPT, Bard/Gemini and Co-pilot, Generative AI, and Large Language Models (LLMs) have been thrust into the spotlight. AI is set to disrupt all industries, especially those that are predominately based on administrative support, legal, business, and financial operations, much like insurance and financial organisations.
By Joe Cooney 22 Feb, 2024
One of the features of life working at PZ is our brown bag lunch and learn sessions; presentations by staff on topics of interest – sometimes, but not always technical, and hopefully amusing-as-hell. Yesterday we took a break from discussing the book Accelerate and the DORA metrics to take a whirlwind tour of the current state of play running “open source” generative AI models locally. Although this talk had been ‘in the works’ for a while, one challenge was that it needed to constantly be revised as the state of AI and LLMs changed. For example, the Stable Video Diffusion examples looked kind of lame in comparison to OpenAI’s Sora videos (released less than a week ago) and Groq’s amazing 500 token-per-second hardware demo on Monday/Tuesday , and the massive context size available now in the Gemini 1.5 models (released a few hours before OpenAI announced Sora...coincidence? An effort by OpenAI to steal back the limelight! Surely NOT!). And now a day later, with the paint still drying on a highly amusing slide-deck for the talk, Google releases their “open-source" Gemma models! The day itself presented an excellent example of why having more control of your models might be a good thing. ChatGPT 4 users began reporting “crazy” and highly amusing responses to fairly normal questions . We became alerted to this when one of our own staff reported on our internal Slack about a crazy response she received to a question about the pros and cons of some API design choices. The response she got back started normally enough, but then began to seem to channel Shakespeare’s Macbeth and some other olde English phrases and finished thusly. "Choose the right charm from the box* dense or astray, it’ll call for the norm. Your batch is yours to halter or belt. When in fetch, marry the clue to the pintle, and for the after, the wood-wand’s twist'll warn it. A past to wend and a feathered rite to tend. May the gulch be bygones and the wrath eased. So set your content to the cast, with the seal, a string or trove, well-deep. A good script to set a good cast. Good health and steady wind!" The sample JSON payload was also in keeping with the rest of the answer. { "htmlContent": "

Your HTML here

", "metadata": { "modifiedBy": "witch-of-the-wood", "safety": "sanitized", "mood": "lunar" } } Hubble, bubble, toil and trouble. Although there were no reports of the GPT4 API being affected by this (only ChatGPT) it might have given people developing automated stock trading bots using GPT4 a reason to pause and contemplate what might have been if their stock portfolio now consisted of a massive long position on Griselda’s Cauldron Supplies. As ChatGPT would say, Good health and steady wind.
Bay McGovern Patient Zero
By Demelza Green 11 Feb, 2024
Bay didn’t start her career out in software development. At school, Bay excelled at maths and physics, but adored writing, English and drama; lost in a world of Romeo and Juliet and epic fantasy.
More Posts
Share by: