Project management is, by its very nature, linear. There is step-by-step process which may fork and merge but which has a critical path and an inherent order.
The Agile approach contradicts this somewhat; iterations look like reversing direction and constant revision appears to be scope creep. As indeed it can be. A good project manager adapts by dealing with a curved line rather than a straight one. But still a line.
Architecture looks at a problem in a more multi-dimensional way. A solution is created by first sketching the shape and adding detail by refining - or changing aspects as you go. A problem has multiple facets which are all valid ways of looking at a system.
This approach works well with Agile, as long as it is incorporated into the (wider*) cycles and a basic enterprise framework is in place beforehand.
Which is, I think, why some junior managers find my ways of working as somewhat frustrating. Senior managers tend to care more about outcomes and oversight than the exact mechanism for getting there.
* "Agile" as practiced in most organisations is more correctly described as 'iterative' where each phase of the SDLC cycles to refine the output and also cycles as a whole to build up a practical system from the "MVP".
No comments:
Post a Comment