"Agile" is an adjective. It's not a noun, or a mindset, or a methodology, or a framework. It's just a word that was coined in 2001 by the 17 people who published this website: https://agilemanifesto.org.
@davidsabine …by 17 white men, who all look very similar. I have wondered how #agile manifesto might look like, if #diversityofthoughts had been higher.
Is there anything in the manifesto and principles that you feel is "anti-DEI"?
The way I read it, the topic is simply omitted (using neutral terms like "customer", "individuals" and "teams" for instance) so by implication, all are included already.
@airwhale@davidsabine I don’t mean the inclusive language, which isn’t present in the translations (i.e. DE). I was wondering how the message would differ if the group of authors would have been more diverse, presenting differentiated perspectives.
In general there are lots of valid topics within the manifesto. However, it’s not necessarily covering the entire product mindset to me. We might need a new version, a #productmanifesto.
Sure, it’s a lightweight, high level statement written almost 25 years ago. Product management wasn’t top-of-mind in the field of software back then. We had our share of spectacular IT-project failures though :)
Yesterday I read this blog post, suggesting that many cultures already align to the values in Agile by default. Only us white guys needed to have it spelled out :)
Is the author's position: if there were more collectivism in the world, people wouldn't have felt the manifesto for agile software development was profound in any way?
His complaint about the authors is not, IME, that they're white — but that they're too libertarian.
If that author is right, there should be examples throughout Communist nations (pre 2001) of self-organizing, self-managing teams that produce high quality software. I don't know of any.
The article is a bit odd, seems the article author didn't have a good interaction with one/some of the Manifesto authors.
I picked up on the cultural angle, individualistic vs collective, which I believe may have some merit. Societies who are culturally biased towards cooperation over competition might have an easier time of applying agile and making it stick. Lower “power distance” (ref. Hoefstede) might help too.
Well, sports is always competetive, isn't it, even if a team sport require cooperation within each team.
Maybe I was using an unclear wording, but I was thinking more in terms of the difference between a individual win-loose mindset and larger win-win mindset. There will always be a sliding scale between these two, but I think they are opposite ends of a spectrum.
@airwhale, Opposing teams are engaged in a cooperative activity. They agree, for example, to rules of the game.
As for "individual win-lose mindset and larger win-win" : I think I disagree that those are in opposition.
Where people are incentivized/allowed to cooperate & compete, freely engage in commerce & trade…that's win-win. Countries, for example, that have reduced poverty and enabled widespread access to schools, hospitals, rule of law…are those that value individual and civil liberties.
Would you rather live in command economy of North Korea with no property ownership or the market economy of Luxembourg? The Congo or United States? UK in 2024 or when it was all fiefdoms?
Which type of government, which type of economy produces more amenities, more prosperity, more public safety, and better quality of life on average?
What, would you say, might be our "cultural difference" ?
I also think there is something to be said for something in between of the USA and North Korean system. There is great suffering in both these countries, directly dictacted by political choices, affecting millions.
Anyway - as I said, it's complicated and we do need a healthy business climate, but the current concentration of personal and corporate wealth is a huge danger to democracy IMO.
Add comment