In 2001, a very interesting document was published that caught the attention of businessmen, executives, academics and students: The Agile Manifesto, which was proposed by a group of software programmers who were looking for a more fluid, faster and more flexible dynamic to operate businesses. All these ideas that captivated at that time, that aroused so much curiosity and generated avant-garde, today have received a death sentence. What happened? These proposals that seemed like universal truths did not pass the test of time, a critical analysis failed and it is necessary to understand the causes of their decline and relevance in the present.
The Agile methodology, so celebrated for project development and management, has seen its luster fade. At the time, it constituted an alternative since it was a response to traditional project management approaches that, by analyzing so much, lost opportunity. Those were the times when the phrase: “analysis = paralysis” became fashionable. Agile promised flexibility, speed, and greater collaboration. However, Agile was taken to the extreme of leading to failure in analysis and faced substantial, growing criticism and challenges that question its relevance and effectiveness in today’s business world.
Not everything was bad. In its origins, it sought to combat the slowness and heaviness of companies that did not react with the speed required to the challenges of bureaucratic processes. In that condition, the fundamental principles of Agile sounded very attractive:
- Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
- Software running on extensive documentation
- Collaboration with the client on contract negotiation
- Response to change about following a plan
In reality, these principles sought to humanize the software development process and make it more responsive to changing customer and market needs. This legitimate proposal contributed to the rise of the methodology. During the first decade of the 21st century, Agile was rapidly adopted around the world. Companies were eager to leave behind rigid and bureaucratic approaches to software development and enthusiastically embraced this new methodology.
Scrum, one of the most popular variants of Agile, which is based on a collection of best practices for working collaboratively, has become the de facto standard in many organizations. Cross-functional teams, sprints, and daily stand-up meetings became the norm, promising to deliver value faster and more efficiently. However, as more companies adopted Agile, problems began to arise. Among the most notable:
- Misunderstandings and poor implementation: Many organizations adopted Agile superficially without understanding its fundamental principles. This led to faulty implementations and team frustration.
- Scalability: As companies grew, it became apparent that Agile did not always scale well. Coordination between multiple teams and large projects was often chaotic and disorganized.
- Pressure and burnout: The iterative nature and need for constant deliveries led many teams to face relentless pressure, resulting in burnout and decreased morale.
- Deviation from the original principles: Over time, Agile became a buzzword and many companies began using the term without truly adhering to the principles of the Agile Manifesto.
The Agile debacle occurred as these problems accumulated, so many companies began to look for alternatives. Many returned to more traditional approaches, while others adopted new methodologies such as the increasing adoption of automated tools and artificial intelligence has changed the dynamics of software development, making some of the Agile practices less relevant.
There are those who think that despite the challenges and criticisms, it is too early to declare the death of Agile. The truth is that many of the practices and principles of Agile have been absorbed by other methodologies and approaches. Instead of being a single, defined methodology, Agile has become part of the set of tools that teams can use based on their specific needs.
The real lesson is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to all problems, and adaptability remains key. The Agile methodology, although no longer the precious jewel it was once believed to be, still has many fans in project management. They argue that its decline is not so much a death as a transformation, an evolution toward more hybrid and adaptive approaches.
Companies and their executives must understand and apply the fundamental principles of Agile, without rigidly clinging to its practices as they will continue to find value in its flexibility and responsiveness. If this is so, true agility lies in the ability to adapt and evolve, and in that sense, Agile is still very much alive.
The relevant reflection around the increasingly repeated declaration of the death of Agile is that we cannot do without strategic analysis. I am afraid that in the application of the methodology, many went to the other extreme. It is true, excessive analysis can generate paralysis. But, the lack of a thorough analysis leads to chaos. This is a universal truth that lasts over time.
Contact:
Mail: (email protected)
Twitter: @CecyDuranMena
The opinions expressed are solely the responsibility of their authors and are completely independent of the position and editorial line of Forbes Mexico.
Follow information about business and current events in Forbes Mexico
