Given the recent influx of articles about Agile, particularly given the recent decision made by the PMI to introduce an Agile PM Certification, I couldn’t escape the thought that we’ve been here before. Different players, different scenery, even different name, but the same act, all over again.
There is something fascinating about us, humans, where – given our natural discomfort with uncertainty – we cling to statements projecting certainty, even when these statements are not supported by evidence. Cast your mind back to the proliferation of buzz words and other claims from recent times, “PM 2.0”, “Social Media”, “Standish Report”, “Upsizing”, “Downsizing”, “Rightsizing”, etc. The consulting industry is thriving on the creation and propagation of such terms as this gives its members the public clout they require in order to promote their expensive services.
This brings to mind the following two quotes:
“Science is a process of separating the demonstrably false, from the probably true” (Michael Zimmerman)
“The much hyped leaders debates are just a political black hole that consume time, money, energy, resources, staff and adrenalin, and rarely produce anything other than a mush tie allowing all the spin doctors to claim a phony victory” (Rod Love)
To have a serious debate we need more than emotions and sentiments, we need credible data on which we can make inferences and policy decisions. In the context of the Agile debate that has yet to happen.
Think about it!