Multidimensional Methodologies

Getting feedback

debhart0 — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 23:35:00 GMT

Oh, and: You might get some interesting feedback from the members of the ScrumDevelopment list... if you are interested.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scrumdevelopment/

Picture's worth a thousand words

debhart9 — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 23:30:00 GMT

Hi Jake... what an interesting diagram.

This sounds similar to the kind of analysis Alistair Cockburn does... I'm not sure how your variables correlate to his in Agile Software Development, though.

When you're happy with it, if you'd like to package it up with your commentary, I suspect the Agile Alliance would be happy to review and post it. I help out on the editorial team - feel free to send it to me if you like.

http://wiki.scrums.org/index.cgi?DeborahHartmann

Deb H.
Certified ScrumMaster/Practicing

re: Multidimensional Methodologies

Alex Hoffman — Thu, 30 Sep 2004 04:50:00 GMT

I think that many believe there is a continuum between plan-driven and agile methods, with iterative development partially overlaid on such a line. Plan-driven process improvement models such as CMMI have moved to introduce iterative, adaptive development, and agile methods are acknowledging that process must be introduced in order to support anything other than small scale development.

And yes, Barry Boehme and Richard Turner (amongst others) have performed similar analysis to you - albeit using different criteria than your own.

I'm not sure your identifying those factors critical to discriminating between plan-driven or agile approaches from a project success perspective. They, however, are more helpful when perhaps comparing agile methods with each other. Mixing the two on this basis might not be taken too seriously, by those involved in large scale development ;)

That goes to including a "waterfall" method in your analysis. Much better to explicitly include say SW-CMM, CMMI, PSP/TSP and SPICE explicitly.

What's a SPIN panel?