The author has experience with both software development and testing, and agrees with Agile principles of emphasizing design and testing throughout development. However, the author observes that in practice, insufficient resources can lead companies to take shortcuts in the Agile process, resulting in technical debt and chaos. Specifically, the author argues that properly allocating adequate resources like time, staff, and talent results in better outcomes than hastily done work. Cutting the wrong corners in the Agile process can be devastating.

1. Drafted: 23/06/2015 01:15 Amended: 23/06/2015 23:19 Posted: 24/06/2015 15:14
I've been in both parts of the software business now for some years: development and test. Everyone knows the importance
of both. Agile movements came along and emphasized that rapid development critically depends on good design backed by
adequate testing from the bottom all the way up the testing pyramid. I fully agree since many more knowledgeable persons
than myself in the industry have spent plenty of time thinking about this. But there are days when I wonder about the
effectiveness of achieving the end result of building a working product, as it is done IN PRACTICE. I do not question the
sound principles and theory behind agile development. I embrace them, not just because they have taken control of the
software industry and its future directions, but also because they are very well thought out and theoretically formulated,
having been refined repeatedly worldwide by many highly knowledgeable experts. Agile methods are now highly
sophisticated and effective systems for software development. Agile became mainstream not too many years ago and is
here to stay for some time.
Agile theory is sound. The way it is sometimes practiced elicits my occasional severe doubts. On those days I conclude:
companies that allocate sufficient resources (time, persons, talent: combination thereof) get better results and spend less
time repairing hastily done work, in a far superior and cost effective manner. The delicate balancing act of resource
allocation, essential for smaller companies, can make the difference between success and failure. Failure has many possible
forms, depending on its definition. My choice is: TECHNICAL DEBT ACCUMULATION. For something that could have been
accounted for and hopefully sufficiently avoided, its persistent presence is a pernicious threat to further expansion of a
software product. Or company.
One further observation: numbers do not necessarily count for effective resource allocation; the combination of ingredients
do. If well-done, a three-person team can produce excellent results, provided that every single project is ADEQUATELY
focused upon, one at a time. Adequately does not mean continuously, from start to end, in this context.
Interruptions by emergencies from multiple external sources have disastrous effects on concentration powers of team
effort. Synergy dissipates, frustration appears, morale dips downward, memories of ideas fade. Resumed projects need a
warm-up phase.
You might think by now the worst criticism has been pointed out. This is not so, unfortunately. My observations have made
me conclude that CUTTING CORNERS in the agile process, especially the wrong corners, is DEVASTATING. A mature agile
system has many sophisticated steps with rules designed to ensure highly probable successful outcomes. Smaller teams are
under pressure to be efficient. Understandably they seek to economize by using a reduced custom version of the agile
development process cycle. When properly done, the outcome can be fine. Too often unfortunately, in my experience, the
decision on what aspects and parts of the process to reduce or eliminate is incorrect. Result: TECHNICAL DEBT (or worse).
Why not arrange the decision process to prevent this? (The verb 'arrange' was chosen carefully: if internal decision-making
is inadequate then seek adequate external help).
To make my point clear:
yes, you can abbreviate agile processes for more efficient use of time but if you don't do it properly you could wind up with
a dreadful self-made mess. There's a single noun for that: CHAOS. Flip the coin by doing things right and you can get:
SUCCESS.
1
24 June 2015
15:14
Agile Post LinkedIn Page 1