Post Agile - In search of a new Metaphor

Agile Software Development seems to be going the same way as a number of other fads in IT, such as Object Orientation and Design by Contract. I use the word fad, because of the faddish adoption curve. Firstly there are the few original proponents with a deep understanding of the new idea, then next is the herd who lack the depth of understanding, but are eager to try the new practices, which they learn by rote, parrot fashion, and then there is the demise and ridicule as the parrot fashion, "cookie cutter" adopters falter and the original idea is discarded, baby and bath water.

One of my favorite quotes is that "the label is not the thing" from the book "Language in Thought and Action" by the psychologist S.I Hayakawa. So Agile Development is just a label, not every team that chooses to use this label is doing the "thing" the original proponents had in mind. So what to do? Should we avoid labels completely in fear that they are abused? Thats one possible answer, but labels do serve a legitimate purpose. A label is a short hand that is useful in conveying a great deal of meaning. You wouldn't want to repeat the whole Agile Manifesto every time you wanted to describe projects that share its values and principals. So the label Agile is a valid one.

The problem I think is that the Agile label conjures up an image that doesn't convey the whole thing. The image is of Gazelles leaping freely through the African Bush. Swift movement, and free spirits operating without restraint.Does this image summarise the values and principles of the Agile Manifesto? Does it summarise why people do Agile development? On one level, the answer is a partial yes. From the perspective of a programmer like Kent Beck, I suppose Agile is an apt metaphor. The freedom to hustle, move quickly and use your skills to get where you need to be fast, without impediment. But does this metaphor summarise why companies like Toyota use an Agile approach? I don't think it does. For them a more powerful metaphor is Lean. This word conjures up an image of disciplined efficiency, where everything serves a purpose and waste is eliminated. No excess baggage, no fat. But does the Lean metaphor describe the whole thing?

I wonder what would have happened if the proponents of the Agile Manifesto had decided to use the word Lean instead? I suspect that board rooms would have picked up on "the thing" more readily. As its stands Agile is often misconstrued by both Managers and Developers as a collection of technical practices, even though tools and technical practices are de-emphasised in the Agile Manifesto in favor of Leadership and sound Management.

Lets look at some of the root ideas of the Agile Movement. Lets see what Edward Deming has to say (Taken from Mary Poppendiecks Leadership presentation on InfoQ):

• Appreciate the System
• A system wide view is fundamental -never sub-optimise
  
• Manage the relationships between suppliers, producers and customers
  
• Knowledge of Variation
• Most variation is "common cause" and is inherent in the System
• Trying to eliminate this variation only makes things worse
  
• Systemic problems lie beyond the powers of the individual worker
  
• To reduce variation, provide leadership in improving the System
  
• Theory of Knowledge
• Use the Scientific Method to measure and improve Systems
  
• Psychology
  
• When it comes to people, the things that make a difference are skill, pride, expertise, confidence and cooperation.
  

To me Deming sums it up well. The noticeable addition in my mind by Deming to the "science" of Management is to recognise that traditional science plays a very small role, and an appreciation of human psychology is far more important.

Perhaps this is why Agility defies precise scientific definition. You either get it or you don't. Agility is a statement about people and how they choose to collaborate. Agile skills are human powered, and are propagated by example by Leaders who understand the importance of empowering others. When talking to people who don't get it, I think I'll be avoiding the word Agile in future. Without a shared experience to pin it to, this abused label is bound to lead to confusion. For newbies perhaps I'll try the yet untainted label "Lean" instead?

On second thoughts, I think its best to avoid labels altogether and just talk about what I do and why I do it. I'm conscious that any label will inevitably fall short, because the "thing" is all encompassing. It is "Agile", "Lean", "Adaptive", "Human Powered" and... a bunch of other stuff too! Just like human pyschology the thing is multifaceted and not easily summarised.

I guess labels are great for marketing and propoganda, but not so great at conveying non-trivial ideas.