In previous articles we discussed a definition of agility and the potential oxymoron of managed agility. I coined the phrase “well managed agility” as part of the solution. I was asked why I used the word “well” in that phrase. The short answer is that anyone can say they are agile. And anyone can say that they manage agile. But doing both and doing them well is the key.
Good management in general is a topic I’ll leave for later. Today, I will concentrate on managing the process of change.
The most important part of managing agility is to have a single person (or a small team that works cohesively) responsible for the agility. Ideally this person, who I’ll call the agility manager, should be knowledgeable and sensitive enough to understand:
1) What the stakeholders want,
2) What the stakeholders need, and
3) The issues involved in delivering the above two items.
The project demands a lot from the agility manager. It demands the ability to get inside the heads of stakeholders and really understand not only what they want, but what they really need. Sometimes even the stakeholders don’t know what they need until they see it (or miss the lack of it). The agility manager must also understand the issues and tradeoffs on the development side of actually meeting those needs (including deadlines).
Some common agility challenges include:
• The system being modeled changes (perhaps the design has evolved, or “assumed” aspects have just come to light)
• The stakeholder objectives change (date, modeling details, purpose of model)
• Modeling problems are discovered (modeling or data collection may be more difficult than expected)
Often changes like these make current plans invalid. Of course the stakeholders want it all and many conscientious modelers will want to say yes to satisfy the stakeholders.
To do the job well, the agility manager must be someone who understands all the above aspects and who can take the broader view to determine what action best serves the stakeholders? Choices like adding feature A versus doing a more thorough job implementing existing feature B, when you don’t have the time or resources to do both. Or when a project is running behind schedule, is it better to schedule extra effort, remove some features, or postpone the delivery date? Only a very knowledgeable manager can correctly make these decisions by carefully weighing the benefits/rewards of each action.
Even better, the most effective manager will try to avoid having to make big decisions like the ones above, by instead making correct calls on numerous similar small decisions that arise on a routine basis. In a future installment I will discuss managing the “routine” and some tools and processes to facilitate that.
VP Products – Simio LLC