Skip to main content

Agile Armchair Generals

If you're an Agile practitioner of any sort you will understand what I mean by Armchair Generals (if not, it may be an idea to check if you are one..).

Apropos of nothing an email arrives that questions the management of your project in terms of whether it is properly 'Agile'.

Feedback is, of course, a great tool.  But it must always be understood within the context of the person providing it.

So when the email lands questioning the type of contingency you've built into your project or the depth of analysis performed on your requirements set, ask yourself:

1. Has the questioner spotted something you and the team have missed? It happens.  That's why independent reviews can be helpful.
2. Has the questioner misunderstood something about your project?  If so, maybe your communications weren't quite clear enough or they've missed something - it happens, we're all busy.

If the questioner has understood the topic correctly and is simply disagreeing with you:

1. They may know something recent that you've not heard about yet.
2. They may be very experienced and are anticipating something you haven't.

Or alternatively, they could be regurgitating their very limited knowledge in an effort to appear knowledgeable.

This is where we find the Armchair General.

Usually this person has completed an Agile PM qualification of some sort and had at least a decent flick through the associated manual.  In their minds (despite often never having delivered a project themselves) this qualifies them to tell experienced Project Managers how best to work.

As so often, language is the give-away.  Armchair Generals tend to come out with phrases like:

"But the book says..."
or
"But that's not how we usually do it."
or
"But Agile says..."

They also disintegrate when challenged with:

"So what's the disadvantage of doing X over Y?"
or
"What's the rationale for doing it your way?"

You are unlikely to get a satisfactory answer but it's more constructive than either caving to their pressure or starting an argument (especially as they're likely to be senior to you).

It's not personal, so don't react as if it is.  Challenge appropriately and see if you can educate them a little on the realities of the front-line.

And ultimately, if they steamroller you, keep an audit trail of the exchange!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The case for Project Management in Agile?

OK, I know how most of the Agile community feels about Project Managers: Process over People Meetings Documentation Urrgh... But however you name the role (Agile Delivery, Scrum Master, Project Manager) and whoever does it  - someone needs to help the team to: Plan Track Deliver Communicate Being a group of incredibly talented engineers does not give a team the right to ignore 3.5 of these. All too often, engineers want to dive in to designing and building great software, but see planning as a hassle, tracking as a waste of time (or an abuse of their rights), communication as an alien concept and delivery (the fun bit) as something that will be done when it's done. It may be popular to talk about being a 'self-organising team' and railing against any form of 'order' being imposed.  But why is that order being imposed?  Maybe it's to deal with the chaos that your s-o-t has failed to deal with so far. As organisations scale and the senior leadership gets further a...

Project Team morale and how it is affected by YOUR leadership style.

If I asked what qualifies someone to lead an IT Project you might immediately think of literal qualifications; a degree, a PRINCE2 practitioner certificate, DSDM certification. You might think of the practical skills needed to achieve Project Management tasks; the ability to plan, management of RAID/CARDI items, stakeholder communication. All of these things are vital to managing a project, but as we're often reminded: Management ≠ Leadership And projects need leaders.   Why?  Because people need leaders.  Humans are pack orientated creatures and we are most comfortable within a structure that supports and guides us.  Within a project the same is true.  The 'doers' usually thrive within a supporting structure that takes care of their (professional) needs and protects them from attack.  Without Developers and Testers the rest of the project team is just a lot of expensive * flesh. In a mature and capable project team there is a certain joy to be ...