thanks for the great replies. The more I think about it, i think Dan points it out nicely: these are 2 topics. Freestyling and education.

I hope you check out my suggestion for the eduction part based upon the Scrum Shock Therapy:

http://www.basdebaar.com/shock-therapy-1582.html

What I don’t agree with is anyone who thinks the “but it requires experts” argument is a strong case against the freestyle approach. It’s just a fact.

Tough problems require smart people. Tough projects require experts to lead & execute them. Organizationally, we should definitely prefer to hire experts for this stuff. Free-styling, creative experts who know their stuff and make it look easy. Process and method are a poor replacement for talent.

The alternative is to rely on interchangeable “human resources” with mediocre skills who try to execute a modestly-effective methodology which they may or may not understand.

Damn right it takes an expert. And yeah, experts are rare and expensive, but you don’t need as many of them… and 10 non-experts cost even more and deliver far less.

Of course, for repeatability sake, it’s nice when an expert takes a newbie as an apprentice and passes the baton.

My ideas are consistent with those ideas of Bas.

Many people have an ingrained need to know and understand the answer to “how do I do my job.” That’s a “structure question,” for the most part. Some of us need to know that answer in great, trivial, monumental detail. Others in simple high-level terms. There is a great deal of variation from person to person.

People who are learning may have different structure requirements than those with vast experience. How we learn is quite different from how we do for many people. For others, the difference is less acute… perhaps non-existent.

For those who take PMBOK as a “structure” and attempt to apply it as such in a wholesale manner, project failure is almost certain. The same thing can be said of XP, RUP, Agile and many other examples. In some cases this might be the difference between a learner and a doer. In others it may be a more fundamental personality difference — “tree people” and “forest people.”

Agile — and Scrum in particular — is almost wholly dependent for success upon the people involved. Not everyone is a born collaborator, or self-directing team guru, or structural minimalist. These people don’t do well in Agile environments. It remains an open question if training can facilitate that change… the personal change required. Since Agile *is* being “dumbed down” the point may already be moot.

As Bas suggests (with humor and insight), choosing the same tactics over and over regardless of position is foolish. Great latitude is required… creative thinking… astute choices must be made dependent on the people and circumstances at hand.

Take what you have to work with, make the most of it, and improve as needed. Those who adapt to change succeed, as Darwin pointed out decades ago.

… Ragga Microphone…

(at least I think that is what he raps)

But don’t get so wedded to any one technique that you start creating more problems for yourself, instead of solving them! Learn to adapt, and pick and choose what is right for you and your project.

Which is why, in the spirit of freestyling, I’m going to have to opt-out of having that as my song…

@Craig & Akshay: I see your point. So Scrum would be ideal for beginners as it is an easy and short recipe. PMBoK would absolutely disastrous for beginners as it is not a recipe, its an encyclopedia of all the food in existence. Is that your point?

@PEZ: Thanks for the input. Somewhere I don’t completely agree, but I am not sure how and where … this will come …

Expert chefs can freestyle. Normal people need recipes.