Name on the box

Flying quote from John Seddon serves as inspiration on subject of institutionalization. It is particularly funny, given that software business is mainly labels on things, and especially funny since we should have some proficiency in analytical thinking of our surroundings.

You know, labels on a box equal money, and if you happen to manage to institutionalize something as big as Agile, which has marketing value these days, you're set out pretty good. If you manage to go as far as setting up a pyramid-scheme-like setup and using agile as a tag-line... Well, sky is the limit I believe.

What comes to boxed goodies, "agile" is a bit short of contestants. There is the S-word for sure, to the magnitude that it's far from uncommon to see that used as a synonym to agile itself. Power of labeled boxes is not to be underestimated.

Witty subheading about controversy between agile values and agile offerings

Sort of institutionalization of agile as a concept has happened, has it been intentional or not. The thing is that the situation, where certain stuff is sold off-the self to support cause that aims for uncovering new ways of doing stuff, is... well, ponderous. To me at least.

But apparently it's good money. And certifications are easy to sell. For a great while I had absolutely nothing agains this practise: I was only mildly amused. Up until I realised that it has been for years me been spammed with the same course offerings, for the same "qualifications" by the same companies. Grand portion of the industry must think this is a norm, since it just keeps on going. Lately though, there has been a bit variety, mostly from the methodologies leaning more on the systems thinking side.

But coming in a box, all the same, at least what comes to deliverables.

And isn't it a bit peculiar? I mean, I know that the search for "enlightement" is not supposed to stop when you get your papers out. But it does take a something special in individual to continue on the path of learning by herself. And I'm kinda eager to say, that if an organization's chosen way of finding betterment is to go shopping, the possible culture of continous improvement may have a bit of a hard time.

But you gotta ...

... start from somewhere. I do hear this a lot. "Go by the book, and start experimenting after you got the basics". The basics of what I wonder...

Your basic problem is, and will about forever be, aligning your work to support your domain. More often that not your domain is providing software for clients, sometimes with certain technological constraints, sometimes not that much. I'm not saying, that getting a bit of this and that from shelves of your local agile shop would be completely in vain. But arming your project managers with mastery of certain sort just might lead you a tad bit astray from the sore spot.

But it's easy for the budget, going shopping, and you can be sure that you get something for the money.

Yadda yadda.

But the easy way out is to just call everything Frank. In the end it tends to leave people much less confused, and more focused to actual matter at hand: improving due dialogue and experiences, shared knowledge (which is the blessing of our time: sharing is more valuable than owning) and Alas!: Ability to relate. On problem solving the latter is pretty much the thing, since this is, after all, a

people sport.

Onwards ahoy

I like mailing lists, but what comes to agile, can't really read any. On part three, let's see why.