The article—posted to my Medium account—reflects on the challenges that Agile-first agencies face when they acquire new clients who often have a preference for traditional, Waterfall project management.

When we’re accustomed to agility and flexibility, we must adapt to provide the certainty and structured approach desired by a new client, balancing the innate human need for both certainty and excitement.

This adaptation involves documenting a delivery approach and being less agile about Agile.

But does changing our approach mean we’re no longer Agile?

Read ‘You know what Agency Clients love? Certainty.’ on Medium.

Originally posted as a thread to Twitter (X) October 2023

Let’s compare a sports situation with software dev best practice. There was recently a huge failure in the refereeing of a football match. A decision was made that processes should have corrected. Gary Neville here is saying refereeing is difficult & sorry should be enough here.

[quote tweet from Gary Neville definding the referee]

In software development we do ‘inspect and adapt’. That is we look at our processes and find ways to improve. We’re transparent about failure and actively look for places we can evolve.

A ‘sorry but’ wouldn’t be acceptable. “Oh there is a demand for speed so we’ll fail occasionally” and “that’s just the way it is”

The least we’d offer is…
Sorry
…and here is why it failed
…and here is what we’ve done to improve the situation

When you don’t offer those things, people (clients or stakeholders) will go looking for the improvement / failure themselves

And that is exactly what has happened with the football VAR failure. Where no change is promised, a change is demanded. It’s a valid ask, and a basic expectation of the consumer of any service. Here that’s refereeing.