All it does is let leadership not define what they actually want, and make changes on the fly, which leads to longer dev times and worse code. Fuck agile, bring back waterfall.

      • fkn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Brutal. Most of the time it’s like watching a car crash in slow motion… Over and over again.

    • Blamemeta@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      11 months ago

      No I haven’t, but its better than finding out that you were supposed to make a mobile app on go-live day, instead of a website. Same basic functionality, but completely different front end.

      • fkn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        That’s… Not agiles fault… This is a systematic failure of project management.

        Besides, if you were doing agile and the business you were working with participated you would have ended up with a version in their hands they should have said was the wrong thing 2/3rds of your development time ago…

        • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah, a lot of “meeting fatigue” is just bad management too. I have been on teams with great meetings where they stop when they run out of things to say (or cancel the meeting altogether!). I have also seen meetings where they go on and on about “virtual meeting fatigue” for 15 minutes. What do you think is causing the fatigue? This extra 15 minutes!

      • yesterdayshero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        That totally sucks. But has nothing to do with agile. That could have happened with waterfall because you would have sat there and developed things in isolation only to find out at the end it wasn’t what was expected.

        • Blamemeta@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          I guess thats true, but at least we would be able to point at a requirements doc instead of a mess of emails and messages.

          • yesterdayshero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            That’s the biggest problem with waterfall to be honest. You can sit there and point at requirements, but requirements can be interpreted differently. And that’s a bigger issue with waterfall because you’re handed a list of requirements with little context on what the purpose is of what you’re doing because you weren’t in any of the conversations earlier on in the process.

            Agile doesn’t mean you don’t have requirements. What happened really sucks. But you aren’t working in agile. You’re just being screwed.

            • Blamemeta@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Yeah, maybe you’re right. Just wish my lead pushed back more, and was a technical person. Probably would’ve stopped this train wreck before it began.

      • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        That sounds like a problem with project scope, not with agile or waterfall.

        The issue is that people read “agile” and assume that means the entire project scope can be quickly changed. You still need a proper scope, even when using agile.

      • fkn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        I have to say though… This sucks. I’m sorry you are dealing with this.

        • Blamemeta@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah, we basically decided to just ship it, and have people do it through their browser. Only saving grace is its an internal app, and “So long as it works on a phone” which thankfully it does. Lots of bickering and finger pointing today though.

      • jochem@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is literally the critique on waterfall (project goes and makes what they believe the customer want, comes back months or years later, turns out they made the wrong thing and wasted so much time) and what agile aims to solve (have regular check in moments to see if the project is still on the right track and adjust when needed).

        In my experience it helps to define a roadmap and stick with that direction. Figure out the details when you start working on a roadmap item. Adjust the roadmap every 6 months or so, only deviate earlier when the situation calls for it. This requires sometimes being able to say ‘no’ to your customer and them accepting it.

      • parpol@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I work in a waterfall project and exactly that happened in my project anyway. If the customer suddenly want large changes, you will have to implement large changes and throw out the entire schedule regardless of using waterfall or agile.