I recently saw a discussion on another forum where an individual raised the question of “What’s next after Agile?” and someone speculated that the next big methodology might be Lean. I’ve also seen some people suggest that Kanban will become the next big methodology. I’ve seen this pattern before – I call it the “Program Du Jour” pattern. Here’s one of my favorite quotes on this subject:
“Americans are our own worst enemy when it comes to new business concepts. We love novelty and newness. We become so enamored with new ideas, we burn through them the way a child rips through toys on Christmas morning – squeals of delight, followed by three or four minutes of interest, then onto the next plaything. That is our pattern with new management techniques, too.
Barry Sheehy, Hyler Bracey, & Rick Frazier, Winning the Race for Value, American Management Association, 1996
The above quote was about business concepts and management techniques but the same thing can be said about methodologies.
Here’s an example – when Six Sigma came into vogue in the 1990’s and early 2000’s, it was really hot, everyone wanted to jump on the Six Sigma bandwagon, and any other earlier process improvement approach was considered obsolete and passé. I published my first book on Business Excellence in 2003 and I interviewed a number of companies for my book at that time. What I saw was that:
- Many companies were doing Six Sigma very superficially and mechanically. In these companies there was a lot of “hoopla” and very visible ceremonies about Six Sigma including Black Belts, Green Belts, etc. The implementation in many of these companies was not very successful because the company was looking for a “silver bullet” and when it didn’t meet their expectations, the company tossed it out and started looking for the next “silver bullet”.
- In other companies where I thought Six Sigma was more successful and lasting, there was a big difference. Six Sigma was seen only as a tool and not a “silver bullet” or panacea,
people in the company understood Six Sigma at a deeper level, and the implementation was not just mechanical and superficial. Six Sigma was so well-integrated into the way the company did business that it might not even have been very visible that it was Six Sigma and they might not even have called it “Six Sigma”
I see a similar pattern with Agile today. Many people today see “Agile” as a “silver bullet” or panacea for almost any problem you might have; in many cases the implementation of Agile is superficial and mechanical; and, when it doesn’t work, there’s a tendency to toss it out and look for something new to replace it. I think that kind of thinking has some serious flaws.
Rather than Agile being replaced by something new, what I hope that will happen is that:
- People’s understanding of Agile will mature, they will start to understand the principles and values behind it at a deeper level, and they will go beyond superficial and mechanical implementations
- People will stop seeing Agile as a “panacea” or “silver bullet” for any problem you might have and rather than force-fitting all problems to some particular methodology like Agile, they will recognize the need to go in the other direction and fit the methodology to the problem
- People will also recognize that “Agile” does not make all other management approaches obsolete and passé and:
- There’s a need to see Agile and more traditional plan-driven approaches in a fresh new perspective as complementary rather being competitive
- Various Agile approaches such as Scrum, Kanban, and Lean are also complementary to each other rather than competitive
This is exactly the kind of thinking I’ve tried to help people develop in the curriculum in the new Agile Project Management Academy. To learn more about that, you can check it out here: