Criticisms of Agile methodology abound and are perhaps nearly as numerous as its praises. I’ve taken issues with a number of its elements in prior posts. Perhaps most surprising is that the original signers of the Agile Manifesto have also seen issues with the practice, especially in how it has been interpreted by others. Here are a few that resonate with me.
- Agile’s Teenage Crisis? by Philippe Kruchten in 2011 describes debate at a 10th anniversary gathering of the Agile founders, identifying a list of 20 issues they found with the state of Agile at the time, which he called “elephants in the room.” He concluded:
The agile movement is in some ways a bit like a teenager: very self-conscious, checking constantly its appearance in a mirror, accepting few criticisms, only interested in being with its peers, rejecting en bloc all wisdom from the past, just because it is from the past, adopting fads and new jargon, at times cocky and arrogant.
- The “Failure” of Agile by Andy Hunt in 2015 begins:
The word “agile” has become sloganized; meaningless at best, jingoist at worst. We have large swaths of people doing “flaccid agile,” a half-hearted attempt at following a few select software development practices, poorly. We have scads of vocal agile zealots—as per the definition that a zealot is one who redoubles their effort after they’ve forgotten their aim.
And worst of all, agile methods themselves have not been agile. Now there‘s an irony for you.
- And following Andy’s last point, The Agile Movement… Is NOT very Agile!! By Mike Beedle in 2017:
It would appear to some, that we, the Agilistas, are “too proud” to take criticism, or afraid of “the mirror” … and improve. Are we suffering from the very same syndrome that those that we so-blatantly criticize for “not changing” fast enough?
He goes on to criticize Agile transformations, frameworks, coaches, trainers, leaders, developers, and implementations – all as being not Agile, using traditional management techniques, slow communications methods, and collaborating poorly.
Key themes from these critiques include topics about which I have written as well including:
- Applicability (Scrum applicability by project characteristics, Scrum applicability by project characteristics – Take 2)
- Undisciplined practice (Pro forma rituals vs. deep understanding), and
- Elitism (The Lake Wobegon Assumption in Agile)
A pragmatic approach to Agile, focused on its purpose and understanding how the tools achieve that purpose, seems the most likely way to avoid the burden of these criticisms.
