What a great piece, Maarten! I do wonder though to some extent whether the fact that people like us get the most annoyed with the dysfunctions we see is also not purely the effect of being more of nonconformists... That's the sense I get when I observe that not everyone I speak about what I see where I work seen as nearly annoyed as I am (with some stuff). What are your thoughts on that?
It's difficult to observe the system when you become part of the system. The longer you are part of a system, the more you take how it works for granted and become unable to see there might be a different way. The way of the system becomes the way in your mind, while that doesn't have to be the case.
If you're non-conformist, you will naturally stay more outside of the system, which has the upside you're better able to see improvements but the downside that the lack of improvement will frustrate you even more.
.. and yet it seems so convincing to introduce something new! I wrote about "Why Frameworks Are Attractive". Summary: They promise to address the very issues that the organization struggles with, such as a lack of innovation, agility, or customer-centricity.
One possible explanation is found in the Manifesto. Creating a plan is not preparing to respond to change. If one prepares for change under the rubric of the right thing, in the right way, for the right reason…(the plan), then that’s the plan to follow.
The manifesto’s error is it implies planning and preparation activities are fungible, conflate-able things. They are quite not!!
Begs the question on why Scrum couldn’t fix that glitch in the application of Agile values and principles?
What a great piece, Maarten! I do wonder though to some extent whether the fact that people like us get the most annoyed with the dysfunctions we see is also not purely the effect of being more of nonconformists... That's the sense I get when I observe that not everyone I speak about what I see where I work seen as nearly annoyed as I am (with some stuff). What are your thoughts on that?
It's difficult to observe the system when you become part of the system. The longer you are part of a system, the more you take how it works for granted and become unable to see there might be a different way. The way of the system becomes the way in your mind, while that doesn't have to be the case.
If you're non-conformist, you will naturally stay more outside of the system, which has the upside you're better able to see improvements but the downside that the lack of improvement will frustrate you even more.
Very interesting perspective!
.. and yet it seems so convincing to introduce something new! I wrote about "Why Frameworks Are Attractive". Summary: They promise to address the very issues that the organization struggles with, such as a lack of innovation, agility, or customer-centricity.
This fits pretty well to your article!
https://www.leadinginproduct.com/p/why-frameworks-are-attractive
One possible explanation is found in the Manifesto. Creating a plan is not preparing to respond to change. If one prepares for change under the rubric of the right thing, in the right way, for the right reason…(the plan), then that’s the plan to follow.
The manifesto’s error is it implies planning and preparation activities are fungible, conflate-able things. They are quite not!!
Begs the question on why Scrum couldn’t fix that glitch in the application of Agile values and principles?