Archive for January, 2008

The US-Russian War of 1981

Friday, January 25th, 2008

Nothing very profound in this comment but something I wanted to post because I’ve been thinking about it all day…

I started reading a new book called Made to Stick by Chip and Dan Heath. It’s about why some ideas are “sticky” and spread while other ideas die out. They start with the classic urban legend of the guy who is drugged and wakes up in a bathtub full of ice and discovers his kidney has been stolen. That’s a sticky idea. Many of us have heard it, and we remember it after hearing it. Sticky ideas and stories aren’t necessarily bad; they are just things that change our attention at just the right time and that are so intriguing/compelling/interesting that they spread like wildfire.

This got me thinking about sticky stories from my past and how perhaps stickiness has changed given the rapid communication of today, including and especially the Internet. One real story from my life is from back in January 1981. I was in college and living in the dorm. Ronald Reagan was newly sworn-in as President. A common joke at the time was that Reagan would start a nuclear war and blow up the whole world. The previous summer the US had boycotted the Olympics because of the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. It was a bit of frightening time.

That’s why I remember how scary it was one Sunday morning when our whole dorm woke to rumors that the US and the USSR had declared war on one another. We couldn’t confirm this, though. Not a single person in our dorm had a TV. None of the radio stations were saying anything about it. This was before Al Gore had invented the Internet. This rumor of US-USSR war was *sticky.* It spread around the whole dorm building within minutes. People were waking others, pounding on their doors saying, “Wake up, we’ve declared war on Russia!” Still, we couldn’t get any real confirmation of this.

I finally called my parents who lived two timezones away and were still asleep. I sheepishly asked, “Mom, did we declare war on Russia this morning?” She thought I was crazy so I explained. While I did that she turned on her television and confirmed nothing was being reported. That was good enough for us. All of us college students went back to sleep.

Two thoughts strike me form this: First, Communication has changed that much in 27 years. It was possible back then to be unable to verify something like a war. If that happened today I’d browse the web on my phone and know in seconds. Second, that was a very first-hand example of how quickly a sticky idea could spread.

It seems that agile might be a sticky idea.

Patterns of Agile Adoption

Wednesday, January 16th, 2008

There are many ways to transition to an agile process. Choosing the approach that is most likely to work best for your organization can be critical to a smooth transition.  In Mike Cohn’s article, Patterns of Agile Adoption, he has identified six core patterns that teams use to initiate the transition to agile.

Mike Cohn Interviewed by PM Boulevard

Monday, January 14th, 2008

Mike Cohn was recently interviewed for PM Boulevard, a website dedicated to expert insights for business results.  Click here to read the article.

Do Products Owners Evolve As a Species?

Tuesday, January 1st, 2008

I recently read an article about how fire ants have evolved such that some ant colonies now have two queens. This has helped fire ants spread and more densely populate certain regions of the United States. If a queen who insists on being the sole monarch is born into a densely populated area, she is likely out of luck. But, a queen fire ant with the genetic adaptation that allows her to share the colony will thrive in a densely ant-populated area.

This got me to wondering whether product owners evolve. The answer is, yes, of course they do.

Just as the fire ants have evolved in ways that allow them to better survive in their environments, I learned recently that product owners do the same. I was speaking with someone who works at one of my clients that I hadn’t visited for a few months. He told me that his product owners have suddenly stopped emphasizing high quality work and bug fixes.

They remain nominally agile–they work in short iterations, have ScrumMasters, pair program, have thousands of automated tests, dabble in test-driven development, and so on. But, product owners no longer treat quality as important.

They now push teams teams to go faster, faster, faster even if that means leaving bugs and sloppy code behind. It took my friend at this client a bit of thinking to figure out what was going on. But what he discovered was frightening.

One of the product owners came completely clean and explained it to him: In their organization there are many projects that compete for resources. When a project is funded it is approved for a certain number of sprints with a certain team or teams. Once those sprints are over the project can request more funding, but it’s likely that another project has already been lined up behind this one.

Being a very customer-foucsed company, this organization has instituted a policy common to many organizations: “Customer-reported quality issues are to fixed immediately.”

Pause and reflect on that for a moment. Suppose you are  a product owner. Your project is approved for a fixed number of sprints. You’d have really preferred more time for your project, but you understand why you only got what you were given. But, if there are quality issues found after your product goes live they will be treated as high priority items and fixed immediately. So, as a sneaky, devious product owner the best way to get more time for your product is to cut quality, cram in half working features and then get them fixed “for free” after you’re out of sprints.

What my friend had found is that his product owners had evolved in adaptation to their environment, just as the fire ants had evolved in adaptation to theirs. His unfortunate situation won’t change until some other environmental factor comes along that changes the motivation and incentives of the product owners.