Kanban replaced Agile.
Rinse. Repeat. Grift.
Get rid of this repackaged, buzzword-filled nonsense. It's the most unproductive busy work I've ever seen. Why is leadership falling for this consultant-level cr@p?
A bunch of people who are justifying their jobs through pithy phrases (e.g., "walking the board"), acting like they alone hold the key to some esoteric efficiency. When in fact, it's the total opposite. Stop the madness!
Lay off THESE people and save those who actually add value.
If you keep uttering "Agile", "Scrum", "Kanban" every day, you will be safe because the management loves these buzz words.
I can concur with all this. Mgmt is a sream of tendy buzzwords, but no substance, as evidenced by the willingness to cut top talent over nonsense like “location”. That is self liniting as anyone with the ability to is leaving under crushing ambiguity and unrealistic expectations.
Peanut butter.
Agile, scrum, Kanban are just more "silver bullets" that have come in this decade. These development systems are bound to fail when the basis for development is unknown.
At the core, it's Wells Fargo management not understanding what the customer needs. They need to address this. They need to figure out what services they need to provide. In my ten years of observing Wells Fargo, I did not encounter any business architecture or business analysis (BSC) that could clearly define the customer's needs. The developer did this work. The result is a hodgepodge of over-engineered web pages (called systems) requiring incredible support.
Another issue with Agile is the proponents are gas lighting cultists.
If Agile fails, it is the fault of the people. They didn't properly change their mindset. They didn't implement Agile correctly.
When so many businesses have problems with Agile, the logical step to take would be to consider the methodology as flawed, not blame people for it failing. A good methodology should not have such a high failure rate.
I rarely hear anyone having anything good to say about Agile. It only comes from execs who read about it in some magazine and those who are Agile Consultants or have job titles like Kaban Lead or Scrum Master. And they have as much credibility as a snake oil salesman since they profit from it directly.
Kanban is a framework to implement the Agile methodology, like Scrum.
If your team uses sprints within Kanban, the sprint is not supposed to be a commitment, but a forecast. If something takes longer than 2 weeks, the forecast was a bit off. BuT that is not how it works in the real world. The sprint is a commitment, so people are working late at night and weekends to meet the commitment because a coworker had to take a couple days off for a sick kid.
It leads to high rates of burnout. Many organizations are moving away from it. But Wells Fargo execs are always a few years behind the curve.
Same with cloud adoption. Many businesses have found out cloud costs a lot more than on prem for data intensive workloads and only really benefits computation intensive workloads. But hey... our execs are recycled failures from elsewhere who want to keep pushing their pet ideas and move on elsewhere before the failures of their ideas are readily seen.
I think a lot of groups start with agile, realize it isn't the best methodology and move to kanban. had they done a proper assessment to beging with they'd have realized it from the get go.
I call it FRAgile.
Agile can work in smaller totally electronic worlds. You cannot rollout change every two weeks to call center and branch personnel, especially the untested cr#@p coming from WF teams right now. Our commercial customers expect perfection not fix and fall forward change management. Waterfall was ki----g us but not because the tech change process was flawed. The funding process was so bad that unless you were a big bad wolf project with a catchy code name you wouldn't get funded. WF still needs to plan and execute incrementally for 80% of its tech changes with only base infrastructure changes handled as a single large project. Incremental change does not mean Agile. Identify the value added components of what you want to do and break the project up to obtain these goals on their own merit. Yes we need special reporting, yes we need regulatory pieces, yes we need cool looking products for our customers, but just do those while executing the true changes that brings profits to the company. We once did a study and wrote a report for the tech leader at Wachovia on why we could execute mergers so well but all large projects failed to deliver on one of the key project drivers of cost, benefit and time. Bottomline, mergers set a date (time) that was immovable, but costs and scope were changeable to hit that goal. Our large projects never prioritized cost, benefit and time. We wanted it all and never got it.
Every company I worked at got rid of Agile for all development except for normal production support because it totally failed in the normal development needs.
Offshoring will just hide the failure of Agile temporarily.
Agile at WF is total clusterfuck. It's more regimented and rigid than waterfall. He-l, in the last area I worked in at WF, we were allegedly agile, but implemented to production on a quarterly waterfall schedule. What the fu-k is that?
It's definitely a racket. I've never seen such a circus. Expecting elaborate processes to fix what's fundamentally wrong with Wells Fargo.
At the core, it's WF leadership that is broken. No amount of "efficiencies" will fix that.
Agile is a total scam and the latest grift. Does not scale and is worthless outside of small, collocated teams.
True Agile is about getting rid of rules and overhead so teams can actually work. WFC’s version is the complete opposite.