Imagine if I blindly follow the best practice , process or whatever metaphor we call it, but if that does not add value to the business, then either my understanding/implementation of that metaphor is not correct or the metaphor needs to be re looked. It is also possible that both cases are true.

Imagine if I blindly follow the best practice , process or whatever metaphor we call it, but if that does not add value to the business, then either my understanding/implementation of that metaphor is not correct or the metaphor needs to be re looked. It is also possible that both cases are true.

But!

Let us first try and achieve the principles as widely as possible before deciding they need to change.

Fundamentally the words on the manifesto communicate an intent, a mindset and an approach – those who simply act on the literal words are already lost – and no amount of 'improvement' will do. Those who really get that agile is about collaboration, changing the entire system (of which software delivery is only a part) do not need new words to understand the context.

We should inspect and adapt – I totally agree. The manifesto words didn't start off perfectly and do need updating (with all due respect to the crafters – its not entirely a timeless piece). But we are not there yet.

“When something important happens, why wait? Why not tackle things as and when they occur. Even if we don’t resolve the issue, it’s worth at least a quick discussion.”

I don't think retrospectives where ever meant to replace just-in-time problem solving. Instead, they provide a check point, an opportunity to share stories and discover things that we simply don't see if we don't stop for a moment and take the time to take a deeper look. Going to a mechanic when you hear a strange voice while driving your car doesn't replace the regular maintenance check, and vice versa. See http://iljapreuss.blogspot.com/2009/09/schedule…

Surely it is the spirit of these ideas we care about. I don't think I've paid close attention to these principles since first reading them in 2003. But I got it: work differently, remove ego, listen, collaborate, emerge solutions, keep it simple, have fun, seek to improve, stop doing stupid stuff.

The Agile Manifesto & Principles were a wake-up call to our industry. I wish people would just leave this historic document alone and treat it exactly for what it is: historical. We don't need an encoded set of rules to tell us what to do, we need concepts, ideas, vision. We need continuous dialog.

Please let's not make the Agile Principles a hand-off document!

For instance, consider “satisfy the customer.” Can we question the implied segregation between a “customer” and a “supplier?” Maybe what we really need is to re-think organizational structure.

Consider “changing requirements.” The Manifesto already dances around the edges of the question of whether anyone can “know” what is required in advance. Can we question this more deeply? There are other ideas out there that may serve the purpose better, depending on context. A couple of examples: Capabilities-Based Planning and Real Options. This begs the questions of managing an “IT portfolio”, budgeting IT activities on a cost-center basis, and running discrete “projects.” IMO there are many opportunities for improvement in this general area. The notion of “requirements” contains unstated assumptions. Let's identify and question those assumptions.

Consider “the team reflects” (etc.). There are practical tools to help teams and organizations with this practice that were not mentioned in the Manifesto, such as the Five Focusing Steps of the Theory of Constraints. Such tools offer concrete methods to implement this principle, taking it out of the realm of magic or blind luck.

When you say “this is indisuputable,” is it really? What if through further technological advances it becomes cost-effective to develop five or six possible solutions to a problem and then throw away all but one of them? Maximizing the amount of work not done would lead us to choose the solution before building the candidates. That's certainly realistic as of today…what what might tomorrow bring?

Since we're questioning things, why should we assume tweaking the Manifesto is the right thing to do? Maybe agile itself has by now served its purpose and is no longer necessary. Maybe it's time to define the next step beyond agile.

Where can I sign?