On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Whatamidoing (WMF)/Sherry Snyder < [email protected]> wrote:
> Matt, I basically agree with you. The problem is that hundreds of our > "customers" do not. Erik said the other day, "2) We do have a higher > tolerance for breaking things". Do you know who "we" is in that sentence? > Hint: It's not our "customers". > > A noisy segment of our customers either don't believe Agile's promise > (that frequent and early pain results in better products) in the first > place, or they don't care that this is (probably) the best of the available > options. They're saying, "Stop poking me with a stick twice a week". > Agile proponents are saying, "Well, the only alternative is that we stab > you with a big knife twice a year". They are very loudly in favor of > "don't poke me at all". > > > TLDR: When those anti-Agile users discover a proposal to spend half a > million dollars a year on making sure that the users keep getting poked > with sticks twice a week, then the people in favor of this proposal should > not be surprised at the results. > Sherry, thanks for bringing all of this up. I'd like to do as Erik suggested and include a 'benefits to end users' (or differently titled/similarly intentioned) section to the proposal with the hope of addressing this head-on. While I've heard rumors and grumblings about users not being so excited by some teams' embrace of agile practices, I haven't been a part of nor seen any of those specific conversations. Can you (or anyone else) point me to some of those conversations so I have more context and a better understanding of the objections? -- Arthur Richards Software Engineer, Mobile [[User:Awjrichards]] IRC: awjr +1-415-839-6885 x6687
_______________________________________________ teampractices mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
