That Thing Called Agile
Agile project management framework is not a new thing. It has been around for more than a decade yet the adoption rate outside the software development circle is few and far in between. I called this resistance: ‘Can’t Change, Won’t Change.’ It is about what I found in recent exposure amongst those who works in the advertising service industry, particularly inside the big players. Call it a temporary lost of sanity, but back in the day when I also worked in the same industry, I knew firsthand that the company that I worked for didn’t adopt Agile. I doubt they even know the existence of the methodology at that time.
It is one thing to talk the game of being Agile with capital ‘A’, but in truth the efforts that many organizations put into was in a very small ‘a’. At best, it is a lip service. At worst, most of those advertising airheads never even heard of Agile. Daily stand-up meetings were in fact, a sit-downs. And instead of the recommended 10-15 minutes time cap, it was regularly overtaken by production issues, project management tasks, and run for almost an hour. In their opinion, Agile adoption is a complete waste of time, because they don’t make product, and their work cycle certainly doesn’t involve any prototype development that lead to any tangible output. They did not have time for user story boards, nor did their employees really want to stick paper and/or post-it onto any type of board. Ideation is not a transparent activity that is openly invite feedback, or god forbid, critiques.
The heart was not in to begin with. There was a lack of space for the team to stick papers anywhere, especially if the organization host themselves in one of those modern building architecture with working space divided by cubicles. Their game was just to rely heavily on selected key people and basically bark command at the juniors staff to do the menial work. There was a distant lack of motivation, opportunity or innovation to extend the electronic task board beyond the machine.
That was many moons ago. I was hoping things change. Sad to say, it did not. Most people I know who works in a traditional design/marketing/advertising agency are accustomed to ‘waterfall’ process, in which the whole project is planned out beforehand with detailed scope and budget guidelines. Then, it is broken into stages/phases requiring deliverables, reviews, sign-offs, and so on. They have used to that method for ages, and it sucks. The only reason for all the scope documents are so the agency and client can argue with each other later who did something wrong when the problem could have been solved early on by simply talking instead of worrying about an exhausting paper trail.
Why would they stick with a methodology based on the antiquated notion that we can accurately predict and plan for the future? How do you even know the full scope and possible risk of a project when you haven’t even start it? A lot could happen between the project kick-off and while it is in full swing. Predicting a sure bet that thing will go as planned is an exercise in futility. That may have worked 20-30 years ago, but the world has change. The industry simply moves far too fast for the Jurassic method to be effective now. Design/marketing projects evolve too fast ~ competition, wide array of new technology, changing trends, etc. ~ to accurately plan it all out from the get go. They need a methodology that is lean, nimble, flexible, and able to respond quickly; a framework that facilitate the team to pivot and iterating as necessary during the course of the project. In a word: Agile.
Now where am I going with this ramble?
I guess this is merely my expression of disappointment in my latest business class programme where Agile methodology was taught. My first reaction to it was, fuck it. I’m going to skip the class. Not only that I am familiar with Agile but also have using the methodology for years. If you work in video game industry like I do in the past 7 years, then you know that in this industry we can’t afford not to go Agile. Iteration and flexibility to pivot midway are essential in our work stream. A typical video game project usually never outlined in minutiae details or scenarios from the beginning, instead we got the big picture and the end game. The rest, we figure things out as we go and if we fail, we fail fast and iterate accordingly. So back to my class… my curiosity gets the better of me and I decided to stay and allowed myself to be sucked into what I know would be a no fun zone working with people who knows nothing about Agile. Now, I am not saying that it’s bad to work with newbie. In some cases, it could be a rewarding experience; especially if they’re open minded and willing to embrace or try something new. But when it is the opposite, then having a root canal sans anesthesia is more preferable than this.
You would think that putting a room of ‘creative people’ would make a difference. But boy, if I could bottle all the negativity, skepticism and resistance around me, I would be rich. In short, a group assignment with those who lacks motivation was pure hell.
But if there’s any learning I could take it was how to deal with mediocrity. How to tolerate it yet not being sucked into it, and simply bite your tongue all in the name of ‘not rocking the boat’. That the team was more important, that surviving the assignment while still keeping the friendship should be in the top list. Agile after all is about human interaction, if nothing else. It wasn’t easy though. And the only excuse I made myself that day was because it was just for school. But dammit, it was hard.
My only critique to the professor was the way he introduced Agile. If I were him, I would make it my business to know my audience. Rather than going full throttle in day one with vague description of Agile, I would start by outlining the pros and cons between the dinosaurs that is ‘Waterfall process’ and Agile. The use case in the class doesn’t help winning the naysayer either. I mean, seriously, how are you going to shed a light to people to adopt Agile if the example on how to use the framework is ‘How Agile Helped Me Dissolving My Marriage in Amicable Way’*. What…? No. Seriously! Really? That’s the best that you can come up with, Professor? Little wonder many of my classmates were skeptical to the point of disregarding the methodology all together. Mastering your game is one thing, but knowing the audience wins you miles. This is empathy in action. So professor, next time choose a better example.