Ever get the feeling that no two people mean the same thing when they say they're 'agile'? We're hosting a GirlsInTech meetup on the evening of 6 March where Laurie will shine some light on this, then Andrea from Zeebox will describe her experience implementing agile in her organisation. Tickets are here - more details below:
From startups to Apple, successful tech businesses always claim to do agile. But what do they really mean? And how can you use agile to ship products, break into new markets and grow your business?
The evening will open with Laurie Young, Head of Operations at New Bamboo, who will give a whistle-stop history of how people have tried to get things done, and his observations that there are at least three different things people mean when they’re agile. With over seven years of driving commercial and development projects, Laurie has seen the gamut: chaos, command and control, and empowerment; he can help you identify what phase your organisation is in.
Andrea Nagel, Product Manager at one of the UK’s leading startups, Zeebox will then share her experience of managing and developing a product in real life. Zeebox has recently adopted a more agile approach to development, so Andrea will share their secrets of how you can practically and quickly implement agile ideas.
Andrea and Laurie will be on hand afterwards to help you improve your processes. And, in true Girls in Tech style, there’ll be plenty of opportunity to meet one another afterwards.
Doors open from 7pm, talks start at 7:30pm on 6th March. To sign up click here.
I hear it said quite regularly when a hierarchical culture meets a more open, autonomous one: "The problem with agile/Scrum/[take your pick] is, where does the buck stop?"
The unspoken thinking underlying the complaint is this, I think. Traditional, hierarchical organisations have some of the greatest impact in the world - pick any national government or multinational corporation if you want an example to illustrate this point. Their success depends on certain features of their organisational structure, like the way responsibility, credit and blame are allocated - namely, at the level of the individual. Any new 'method' must conform to hierarchical standards of responsibility, credit and blame.
It was 2013, some time mid-November. Chair in front of desk; laptop screen open. Low brightness. Hurts my eyes when the screen's too lit up like that. Text editor running full screen, some sort of distraction-free mode or something. The cursor blinked in the top left corner, waiting in unwavering anticipation for something -- didn't matter what -- like an expectant puppy. Minutes became hours, and the cursor blinked just as it did before. Never got tired or bored; it had the patience of a saint.
Do you ever get the feeling that no two people mean the same thing when they say "Oh yeah, we do agile"? Or perhaps you sympathise with those pleading us return to Pure Agile, like the Manifesto authors intended.
At 6pm on Wednesday evening, Laurie is presenting a whistlestop history of how people have approached getting things done, from Henry Ford to modern software companies, and how there are at least three different things people mean when they say they’re agile - which has obvious rammifications on company culture.
Like most developers, I find the opportunity to abstract a language feature is often irresistible, and is a great way to learn about how something actually works. The question of whether or not the result is usable or useful is often irrelevant.
After seven years at New Bamboo, I’m leaving to start something new.
In the last three years, I’ve helped New Bamboo grow from eight expert devs and one very busy MD into to a real company, a smooth-running and varied team of 23 (and still growing). We’ve shipped applications for tiny startups and huge enterprises. We’ve solved hard technical problems, harder process problems, and helped to make web development better. We’ve learned by doing and led by example.
When I'm not working with New Bamboo's awesome teams I'm often to be found obsessing about photography. In fact I've spent time on evenings and weekends writing a book on photography, and in doing so I started to see many similarities between photography and creating software.
In the early days of photography, practitioners often modified the shots they took with paints, engravings, and so on. Sometimes they staged the photos to look like scenes from classical mythology, too.