Federal Times: ‘Agile beyond the buzz’

Federal TimesThere’s no doubt that Agile will play a pivotal role in modernizing government IT, but this Federal Times article contends that without careful education, investment, and partnerships around Agile, it can become an over-used buzzword rather than a true change agent.

From the article:

There’s a lot of talk that agile contracting is the panacea to the inefficiencies and stagnant processes affecting IT development in government. But what exactly is needed to move the needle beyond buzzwords?

For government IT systems development, it’s not a question that better methods exist. To create more innovative ways of thinking about agile, greater partnerships and trust between the contracting and government community are desperately needed.

. . .

It’s crucial that agencies understand the investments agile requires. In a traditional waterfall outsourcing model, contractors work on a project largely independently and come back to government customer once it is completed. With agile’s philosophy strongly rooted in measuring results at regular intervals, agencies cannot divorce themselves from the process of building the solution. Rather, agencies must be an active participant throughout the entire engagement. Agencies should consider resources, such as agile coaching, to help gain familiarity with this increased involvement as true innovation cannot be outsourced.

Read the full article: Agile beyond the buzz | FederalTimes

2017-04-23T23:02:54-08:00 June 23rd, 2015|Categories: Agile government|Tags: |

About the Author:

AGL served the government innovation community from 2014 - 2020. It has now broadened its mission and community to form a new organization, Technologists for the Public Good. Learn more and get involved at publicgood.tech.

One Comment

  1. Cliff Berg June 23, 2015 at 3:58 pm - Reply

    The problem is that the government does not want to pay what Agile teams cost. Agile promotes self organization, but that only works with “A” teams; but government tries to get the lowest cost bidder, instead of seeking quality. If a team does not perform, but you can’t find a vendor that can do better for your lowball rate offer, then you are stuck with a flunky vendor that does not understand Agile and does not have the technical competencies that Agile requires.

Leave a Reply