477
Study finds 268% higher failure rates for Agile software projects (www.theregister.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
115 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

We all knew it

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm always sceptical about results like these. I was told that waterfall always failed when I'd worked on successful waterfall projects with no fails. The complaints about waterfall were exaggerated as I think are complaints about agile. The loudest complaints seem to always be motivated by people trying to sell sonething

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    My crazy wacko conspiracy theory - software development is just a really weird discipline, most of the people in the field are bad at it, and it doesn't have the same amount of standardization and regulation that other engineering fields have, so doing it "right" looks a lot fuzzier than doing, say, civil engineering "right".

    The biggest thing though is that most people are bad at it. It's really hard to evaluate high level organizational concepts like waterfall vs. agile when we still have developers arguing over the usefulness of unit tests.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago*

    I so agree with you. Especially that software engineering is not like actual engineering. Ironically that's the first point of the agile manifesto - is all about the people and interactions, not the tools and processes. That's why I'm leery about these grand claims about agile failures when half the time they mean scrum and just doing scrum isn't agile (see point one of the manifesto)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    I think it's more that they are trying to solve the problem by changing the dev team processes, when the biggest factor of success is developing the RIGHT thing. But since most tech managers have risen up from the ranks of devs, and they have a hard time understanding that other people have valuable skills they don't, they have no idea how to hire good designers and refuse to listen to them when they happen to get one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Ignoring the success and failure of agile and waterfall. Waterfall was just a way more enjoyable development experience for me. That would probably change if the cycle was lower though. Also doesn't help that many managers I've had don't follow the rules of agile/SCRUM. Seems like people use it as an excuse to be able to change things on any given day but those cycles are supposed to be planned, not the plans.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •