blogs.conchango.com

welcome to the conchango blogging site
Welcome to blogs.conchango.com Sign in | Join | Help
in Search

Simon Evans' Blog

My blog covers the technology areas I focus on here at Conchango, namely Architecture using the .Net Framework, ASP.net 2.0, WCF and Agile development practices.

How Microsoft has confused the term Agile with Flexible

This morning I went to a presentation on MSF Agile for Visual Studio Team System (VSTS).

I have never written a blog on Agile before, because although I have been using the process in anger for six months now, I do not consider myself an expert in the subject.

But today has forced me to blog on the subject, because what I saw so clearly misses the point of Agile. I have two the reasons why Microsoft has done this: 1) It wants to use the term agile because it sounds good, or 2) It thinks Agile means Flexible. Maybe its both.

One of the key things I like about Agile is that it is light weight; you only have as much formal process as you really need, because heavy processes cause friction in the development cycle. If you use a more formal process, it must be easy to use and provide significant value add - otherwise it gets in the way of solving the problem. A great example of this is the new class designer is Visual Studio 2005. We use it regularly on the projector to conduct group design sessions. It has more friction and is more formal than a white board, but the pay off is a better automatically written interfaces. This saves us hours of dull coding.

So now to MSF Agile in VSTS, which by all accounts appears to have formalised the whole process. Oh, and MS Project makes its way into the process. There was talk of use cases as well. In short, it looked like RUP. And then so did old MSF. What they have done is provide a heavily customisable tool that lets you taylor the process. This seems to be what they mean by Agile.

Now, I'm not adverse to RUP, but I feel annoyed that Microsoft have hijaked the Agile term, and turned into formal. There is nothing Agile about MSF. All it is is a flexible tool for managing a formal process. Rant over.

Published 09 June 2005 23:32 by simon.evans

Comment Notification

If you would like to receive an email when updates are made to this post, please register here

Subscribe to this post's comments using RSS

Comments

 

simon.evans said:

Simon, whilst I have no doubt that Microsoft would redefine agile to meet it's own requirements, I see no reason why the Microsoft Solutions Framework (MSF) and an agile approach (the Conchango meaning of the word - as in Scrum) can't co-exist.

As I commented in my blog post on the Microsoft solution accelerator for business desktop deployment (BDD) last February (http://blogs.conchango.com/markwilson/archive/2005/02/10/973.aspx):

"At the heart of MSF is the process model, which includes a five stage lifecycle for the solution. Based on phases and milestones, at each stage there are clear requirements in order to justify the ongoing cost of development. For example, there is no value in spending time, effort and money on planning the solution until the vision and scope for the project has been agreed."..."In my opinion, envisioning is one of the most important areas of any desktop deployment and is also one of the most overlooked, generally because a customer can't see the value in up-front planning and needs to be seen to deliver something to the business as soon as possible."

As I understand it, using an Agile methodology takes that a step further, by breaking the solution into manageable chunks with defined deliverables at the end of each iteration (let's call it a "sprint"). This has another advantage in that it provides a deliverable very quickly for a client of what I call "JFDI" (just 'ing do it) school of thought. So, for example, in the past we have tended to run infrastructure deployment projects using a traditional waterfall approach - now we might use agile methods (supported by solution accelerators) to quickly develop a platform in a number of iterations, each one getting closer to the final solution; but the overall project still needs to follow the MSF lifecycle stages of envisioning, planning, developing, stabilising and deploying - perhaps just many times over as lots of agile iterations.
June 10, 2005 11:38
 

Rob Caron's Blog said:


On the off chance you’re not reading David Anderson’s award-winning blog, here’s what he had to say...
July 5, 2005 01:28

Leave a Comment

(required) 
(optional)
(required) 
Submit
Powered by Community Server (Personal Edition), by Telligent Systems