Analyst Watch: Water-Scrum-fall is the reality of agile

Agile leaders reconvene at Snowbird Gathering will mark anniversary of signing as leaders review how far they've come and what needs to be done next

Emergn creates work-based learning program for agile development Value Flow Quality Education program for agile, lean thinking and practices launched at Agile2012 conference

Tools for Scrum Seven leading suppliers of agile tools talk Scrum, sharing how their Scrum tool makes development teams more agile

Comments

12/20/2011 09:33:17 AM EST

You are on point but many years too late. I was a consultant in 2006 preaching the virtues of a true Scrum process framework implementation. Within one organization I worked with, they had 4 delivery streams active (think: million dollar projects), only 1 of 4 were true Scrum, the others were what we called "ScrummerFall" or "AgileFascade" - a mash-up of cherry picked Scrum and Waterfall features. These 3 delivery streams had management that resisted a full Scrum implementation and it showed. The one true Scrum delivery stream that had a project stakeholder sitting with the project team, et. al was on time, on budget, and was the model for all other future delivery streams once the CIO saw how well it worked. Remember though, Waterfall is not without its place. Waterfall is useful when everything is known up front or needs to be known up front (think: spaceship software). Agile is useful when things are NOT known (think: most web development these days). Iterative (cycles of understanding) and incremental (frequent delivery of working system) process frameworks do not always fit into every situation with good reason.

United StatesDaniel Bullington

12/20/2011 01:55:51 PM EST

While I share your observations, I think the term water-scrum-fall is misleading and dangerous. Scrum in its very strict setting can by definition not ly between water and fall, IMHO. What we observe is people not doing scrum, when the do just parts of it. Frontloaded (or upstream) processes are in my view not Scrum, this is Scrumbut. If an organization embraces agile practices it will maybe also face the problem of proably not delivering fast to production. In oder to become agile, they will also adopt continuous delivery eg. and even change their architecture to enable it. If they don't they are not shippable, that's also Scrumbut. Scrum helps surface those problems, besides hundreds of others. Being agile is also the mindset of adressing those problems, eg. to get faster feedback. I am very unhappy about the title of this article and the term Water-Scrum-Fall, imho it puts Agile and Scrum in a wrong light. I am happy you put the solutions into it. What one might observe is organizations failing to adopt Scrum and agile practices on an end-to-end level, that's different from what the term states. Nobody says adoption of Agile and Scrum is easy. Sorry, but I had to say that.

AustriaAndreas Wintersteiger