Curious to see what everyone’s feelings/thoughts/reactions are to the above (for the uninitiated, see this link). At first I had what I assume is the standard reaction, which was a gagging noise followed by rolling eyes…but the more I dug into it the more I’m intrigued. I don’t see this as a tool to use walking in the door to sell someone on Agile adoption but for an experienced practitioner I could see this being useful as a reference tool comparing different approaches to topics in the same tangenital space. Thoughts?
Looks interesting but it’s hard to tell; Is there a version that’s legible? I think there are other threads talking about this here as well…
here’s the deck it comes from, there’s a good copy in there… http://www.slideshare.net/ChrisWebb6/last-conference-2016-agile-landscape-presentation-v1
here’s the the actual slide itself http://www.slideshare.net/ChrisWebb6/agile-placemat-v9
I don’t understand why we feel the need to make agile complex and saturated. Would someone explain why 12 principles to help guide behavior requires this kaleidoscope of buzzwords?
If you read the names of the stops on this subway-map-to-hell, you’ll find a good dose of irony (just one: “visual waste”)
We’re humans, making things complicated is what we do! Over-generefication or classification is part of the human condition…have you ever listened to someone try to classify different flavors of heavy metal/movies/comic books? In the quest to find a “one word/one size fits all” descriptor we fracture and make classification overwhelming.
I think the subway map is a sign that we’ve overcomplicated things, but the question is all that complication warranted? I’m all for KISS but at the same time maybe we do need to create different levels of strata?
Not agreeing/disagreeing with you, just trying to drive conversation.
“Levels of strata” doesn’t register for me.
The truth is this is a company that struggles with Agile business (and reputation in this domain), therefore a play on executive preference for visual aids/formats/content is a calculated move to elicit a sales conversation, regardless of fit, with a neat side-effect of a guaranteed retainer.
I see a node in “Test Driven Development” called “Acceptance Criteria.” Think about that. What problem does classification solve and in service to who?
Interesting post RE: the topic at hand.
The original reaction was the same as the tweet storm. I printed out the Agile Placemat, showed it to people and jokingly said I finally had a good map to “implement Agile”. Secretly though, I really liked the map, because as a beginning Scrum Master, there is always the fear that I am missing something important. This map provided some form of structure where all concepts seem to come from. It might be far from perfect, but it does show me if there are interesting corners of the field that I can read up on.
I don’t ever agree with people being sharply rude, insulting, or degrading.
And there were certainly a handful of mean spirited comments to this work.
But the vast majority of critical feedback I read, and those I myself provided (including some commentary in upcoming podcasts), are fairly critical of the content and presentation.
I have no interest in degrading the author. I’m familiar with him, also. But this approach to selling agile strikes a nerve for many people because it’s inhibiting, confusing, and sends a message to organizations that we ultimately spend years trying to de-tangle.
This text explaining the context should always be included with that diagram IMO!
“We like to conceptualise Agile as a highly interconnected landscape of practices transporting ideas across zones to value. There is no perfect starting point, nor an express line or a direct route suiting all conditions.”