|
|
|
|
|
by SideburnsOfDoom
1031 days ago
|
|
> There needs to be a stable narrative to shareholders I don't disagree with that. In fact, knowing the end goal is even more important when actions are "skunkworks". > Moving all software development into part of the business with 0 expected returns Agile's focus on "Working software is the primary measure of progress. ... early and continuous delivery
of valuable software." is IMHO the opposite of that characterisation; as it demonstrates value and solicits feedback as soon as feasible. Note that this has very little to do with "is it following a pre-agreed plan or not?". The issue is more that too many businesses believe that software development is best done as top-down detailed micromanagement, and the tools at hand (i.e. Jira) lean into this delusion. |
|
I just think that anything not top down doesnt play nice with shareholders. Also doesnt play nice with management that want to say they are the ones that got something delivired.
Seeing projects get rejected as they delivier too much of an improvement (e.g. we only predicted 5% savings this is likely to give 40%) really opened my eyes to how important it is to appear like you are more in control than you are.
On the skunkworks suggestion, i was meaning dont put anything from that team into any forecasts until you have a better measure of the impact.that way you controlthe narative better.