|
|
|
|
|
by laurent92
1565 days ago
|
|
z) Customers are gonna complain anyway and ask for more, so better make 80% of the feature and see what they focus on. z’) If we deliver 20% of the wrong feature, the customers are going to say it and we can reorient before we make the other 50%. #Agile I’m not very satisfied either but the history of programming is riddled with us building overengineered solution to the wrong problem. |
|
* Customers signed off on requirements; they may not have liked them, but they knew what was coming. And when.
* The dev org got to have the (IMO important) psychological journey of discovery, creation, testing, "oh shit", last minute fixing, last second covering up, and the final human release of... releasing. Big celebration. Yay, we did it. My last couple positions have been SAAS stuff where we "release" tiny little things multiple times a week; sometimes multiple times a day. Honestly, it's a grind. There's no "big win". It's akin to "death by 1000 cuts". You don't have the big wins or the big losses, but you get ground down by the never ending stream of small stuff. Writing an app is like putting yet another pat of snow on the snowball.
I get where agile is coming from, but a lot of times it fails to recognize that sometimes, people actually DO want to be surprised with big things, even if they're not 100% positive. And sometimes, customers DO want to have the vendor "Just deal with it and leave me alone - I can't be bothered multiple times a month (or week!) to look at your teeny little new thing. SHOW ME THE FEATURE WHEN IT'S DONE." They WANT that ability to gripe all at once in the end, and not be part of the "steering committee - what am I paying you for if I have to dictate everything?"
I'm being hyperbolic here of course, but I've seen versions of this play out numerous times.