A study has found that projects adopting Agile practices are 268 percent more likely to fail than those that do not. Even though the research commissioned by consultancy Engprax could be seen as a thinly veiled plug for Impact Engineering methodology, it feeds into the suspicion that the Agile Manifesto might not be all it's cracked up to be.
https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/05/agile_failure_rates/
@fexd
Well, agile isn't a project management methodology, now is it? People are so locked into traditional project thinking and fail to imagine anything else.
But yes, it's a huge shift in mindset. Technology and processes are easy to change – people and culture change is WAY harder.
@fexd “thinly veiled plug” is an understatement. The ‘studies’ were conducted for the purposes of writing a book about a competing ‘methodology’ that the author has invented.
More generally I would note that things like the ‘ability to discuss and address problems’ had almost as large an impact — but a rigid and hierarchical organisation and approach is least well placed to do well in that regard. Agile isn’t perfect and is often poorly implemented but comes closer than any alternative IMO.
@fexd
🤦♂️ „One standout statistic was that projects with clear requirements documented before development started were 97 percent more likely to succeed. In comparison, one of the four pillars of the Agile Manifesto is "Working Software over Comprehensive Documentation."“ I’ve never read a worse interpretation of „Working Software over Comprehensive Documentation." That has nothing to do with requirements! It’s talking about software documentation of IBM magnitudes… #agile