At the same time I am aware there may not be answer, no matter how unsatisfactory this answer feels. The basis to Right Understanding is in knowing that a new understanding is needed. Learning the agile techniques requires practice, since much of it is experiential. This covers the hows, I think its the whys that require a deeper inquiry, both of the programming techniques, and the softer techniques that imbue the values and principles of agility.

My call out, is to that very point. Understanding something as different as agile that challenges old schools of thought is going to take time (indeed thats one of the points I mention), but the responsibility for me comes in commiting to recognising the differences such that leadership in times of adversity can prevail. Of course, theres no substitute for success, but people strat agile development expecting the holy grail, and its no grail nor silver bullet.

It has taken me five years or more to understand agile development to the level that I do, and I am aware my journey continues. I see agile development as being a rather important concept to move over, and I see that there could be more ease with the process if there was more understanding, or indeed understanding that there needs to be a different understanding to the way things used to be. I see *that* as responsible.

Very simple example: developers creating technical stories. In almost every project I have taken part in, developers end up arriving at the same hotel of developer tasks on the road to learning the practice; this is a nice cosy place that makes it easy to relax in the warmth of things that feel too difficult to turn into a user story. I see it every time because theres something different that needs to be appreciated, and nobodies at fault for thats the process. With a little more understanding, such issues can be worked with at a deeper level. Seeing that we are customer-centric, business-value-centric, and that we are not spending our time in the 64% domain of features that seemed-like-a-good-idea-but-nobody-actually-used-them.

Maybe chasm is the wrong term, I did wonder about it. My real point is simply understanding that learning C# is very much like learning Java, but learning Agile is completely different to working with waterfall practices.

I have seen in recent times some rhetoric both for and against the term Agile. I remember reading somewhere that the term Agile was used in the 90’s in a different business domain to software development, referring to organisations that embrace change and create change for their competitors; indeed survival itself is fed on the oxygen of the riches from embracing change.

And I have to say, I disliked the term, liked it, disliked it, and at the moment I’m not sure what I think. I know that Kent Beck has publically begun using the term Responsible rather than eXtreme or Agile. Responsible represents a shift in conduct and respect from the top-down within the organisation, again focusing heavily on the people element; peopleware.

An observation I have had on multiple occassions, is that sometimes a manager supports the use of agile development as much as he would support the upgrading of the developers computers, or buying them an extra flat-panel monitor. Its a new “gimick” the development team folk seem to like; “..but just make sure you deliver!” The issue is that it is so much more than a gimick or new technique.