
Scaling Agile at Spotify (2012) [pdf] - vilda
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1018963/Articles/SpotifyScaling.pdf
======
sportanova
"But so far, based on surveys and retrospectives, the scaling model seems to
be working quite well!". Statements like that remind me of a North Korean
election - "SUPREME LEADER ELECTED JOYOUSLY AND UNANIMOUSLY!". Grunts that
don't like the newest management fad / reorg aren't looked upon kindly

A great test for "could I work at this company?" is to ask "do they have full
time Agile Coaches / Scrum Masters / etc.". If yes, then I'm moving on

~~~
cvanlaw
I'm curious: Why do you consider Agile Coaches / Scrum Masters / etc. a red
flag?

~~~
sportanova
I despise Agile, and if you have people whose full time jobs are to enforce
Agile, then it's a big sign that it's not an environment I want to be in

~~~
dragonwriter
> if you have people whose full time jobs are to enforce Agile

...then you aren't whatever you call it, its _not_ Agile, which has, as its
first value: _Individuals and interactions over processes and tools_

~~~
sportanova
In the end it's impossible to criticize Agile because the way supporters frame
it is that all good things are Agile, all bad things are not Agile and / or
Waterfall. Goodness and Agile are inherently linked, so the presence of
badness must mean that it is not Agile, or at least not properly practiced
Agile.

Agile as it's practiced by 99% of practitioners is more like "processes and
tools over individuals and interactions". Infantile retrospectives, constant
stand up status meetings, status meetings dressed up as "grooming" and
"planning" where the only real (non)decision that's being made is how many
"story points" should be assigned. You can barely go to the bathroom without
filing a Jira

~~~
dragonwriter
> In the end it's impossible to criticize Agile because the way supporters
> frame it is that all good things are Agile, all bad things are not Agile and
> / or Waterfall.

Agile-as-defined is a fairly abstract set of priorities, it doesn't specify
practices, so criticizing particular practices _isn 't_ criticizing it. There
are plenty of legitimate criticisms of it, still, particularly that its _too_
ill-defined to concretely implement.

Criticism of "Agile"-as-practices are generally misplaced, because there is no
coherent unity in the practices people implement and apply that label too.
Criticizing the various practices that people call "Agile" is better done by
focussing on the actual practices that are being criticized than on "Agile".

At least, if one is interested in usefully sharing experience in a way that
informs and advances quality practices. If one is merely interested in
emotional venting, then "Agile" is a fine target.

~~~
sportanova
> Criticism of "Agile"-as-practices are generally misplaced, because there is
> no coherent unity in the practices people implement and apply that label too

72% of Agile practitioners use some form of Scrum. 80% do standups, 71% do
"planning", 69% do retrospectives. That's a pretty coherent majority that
engage in practices labeled Agile.[1]

Around 70% of Agile practitioners do these - does it have to be 100% before
these practices are Agile? There ABSOLUTELY is a coherent set of implemented
practices that are Agile

> Criticizing the various practices that people call "Agile" is better done by
> focussing on the actual practices that are being criticized than on "Agile".

I did: "Infantile retrospectives, constant stand up status meetings, status
meetings dressed up as "grooming" and "planning" where the only real
(non)decision that's being made is how many "story points" should be assigned.
You can barely go to the bathroom without filing a Jira".

You're proving my point that it's impossible to criticize Agile... But I will
admit that (paraphrasing) 'All your criticisms are invalid because Agile is
abstract!' is a twist! That's much more interesting than just screaming
"WATERFALL!!"

If you had questions or criticisms of my criticisms, ask for clarification or
make counter arguments - I want a good debate! It's intellectually light-
weight to call someone emotional, while one is obfuscating and acting obtuse.

[1][https://www.versionone.com/pdf/state-of-agile-development-
su...](https://www.versionone.com/pdf/state-of-agile-development-survey-
ninth.pdf)

------
jonesb6
Still a great read. Probably the major reason why, when every year I cut down
all my subscription services, Spotify remains.

------
vidoc
Is there a Glassdoor kind of website that categorizes companies by the process
they use? That would be pretty helpful...

~~~
sportanova
It would be, until management sees the way that they're categorized and start
faking votes / reviews. Then it would be an arms race on who can be the most
Agile. Scrum -> Agile -> Agiler -> SUPER KANAGILEBAN MEGA!!!

------
rust4homoslol
Gah, OK time to switch to Apple music.

~~~
vskarine
What don't you like about the document?

