I was surprised recently when I was told that "Agile's ok, but it's expensive". That was a first for me. I'd never heard anybody say that before. What could possibly have possessed them?
It's the sort of statement that sets my mind racing. What could I have missed? Is it perhaps true? After all, many say that perception is reality. It was no good, I was going to have to think about this further.
So, here I am, thinking... is Agile expensive?
First, let's understand the basic premise - "I thought 'it' was going to cost X, but 'it' ended up costing X+Y and I got less (of 'it') than I expected.". If indeed that is your reality then I can certainly sympathise. However, can you attribute that failure to being Agile? Isn't this just a classic example of project overspend, de-scoping and, quite probably, time overrun?
Perhaps being Agile has somehow exacerbated the situation? Perhaps the innate ability to embrace and respond to change has been so successful that the only logical conclusion is project failure?
Let's walk through a simple example. Assume at the start of the project I want 5 features delivered and the estimate is 5 person weeks of effort. The team diligently produces the first 3 features, expending 3 person weeks, which are then presented for feedback. Naturally some changes are discussed and prioritised. Being Agile, the team responds. After a further 2 person weeks of effort (reaching the original budget), the team presents the 4th feature, plus the prioritised changes. More changes are approved and the team then expends 1 further person week to complete those...
STOP! Look at what just happened. Because we responded to the changing requirements, we only got 4 out of 5 features delivered for a cost of 6 rather than 5 person weeks. At the micro level, the team took the appropriate direction and delivered the most important features, but at the macro level we have (perceived) overspend and de-scoping.
In my experience, at the iteration-to-iteration micro level, this type of occurrence happens all the time. So, if you're not rolling that up and communicating appropriately at the macro level, it's no wonder that Agile can be perceived as being expensive - "I'm getting less and it's costing me more" screams out, even though what you're actually getting is what you want, not what you originally thought you wanted.
No doubt my example is one of many reasons that might explain the 'expensive' comment. However, I can definitely relate my own experience to that example and, I think, it is an important reminder that managing all stakeholders and their expectations is every bit as important as being Agile in the first place.
