Hi Rajat,
I am working on such issue in my current assignment and finally reach to the conclusion that better turn everything into Agile. The reason twofold a) the need to time-to-market when the design is not fully closed b) What I call “OpsDev”, that is, feedback to improve the product based on monitoring performance in time of production. Try both issues with older methodologies: it is impossible to reach to a suitable outcome, especially issue b).
Hi Rafael, thank you for sharing your thoughts. How about internal facing IT systems like ERP?
I think that completely depends on the size and culture of the organization. In a larger operation, appearance and politics play mostly a larger role. As decisions are often taken by committee, the agile method actually gains in importance. Doing S/W development through Waterfall and Change Request has the potential to turn into a disaster when decisions are taken this way. As people generally are resistant to change and suspicious of management, much explicit/formal communication will need to take place to convince the workforce to adapt to methods which they have not worked with before (i.e. agile instead of waterfall).
When the organization is small, people are usually more readily available for frequent person-to-person communication. Introducing new methods and explaining jargon are easier and more effective this way. The challenges mentioned above can usually be mastered more easily. They are, however, potentially present and must be considered in a smaller organization also.
I think that completely depends on the size and culture of the organization. In a larger operation, appearance and politics mostly play a larger role. As decisions are often taken by committee, the agile method actually gains in importance. Doing S/W development through Waterfall and Change Request has the potential to turn into a disaster when decisions are taken this way. As people generally are resistant to change and suspicious of management, much explicit/formal communication will need to take place to convince the workforce to adapt to methods which they have not worked with before (i.e. agile instead of waterfall).
When the organization is small, people are usually more readily available for frequent person-to-person communication. Introducing new methods and explaining jargon are easier and more effective this way. The challenges mentioned above can usually be mastered more easily. They are, however, potentially present and must be considered in a smaller organization also.
Hi Eduard, Thank you for the valuable perspective. What you mentioned i relevant. How about change management required for every change in an agile environment. think of a scenario where a contact center needs to be trained on every change to be able to service the customers!!
Hi Rajat,
if I read you well, the challenge is that the people who require the changes are not the same ones to apply them later. It may be helpful to get some of the people from the contact center itself involved in the evaluation of progressive product iterations. Otherwise, the end product may in production not be as useful as intended. For the rest of the team, a communication system for self-study or an explicit training course may be necessary. I would tend towards the former, as personnel turnover in contact centers tends to be quite high. This may be one occasion where that actually may prove helpful.
Thank you Eduard for valuable inputs
Hi Rajat, business need and relevance to business context should be your deciding factors. More over Agile, devOps are new ways of doing things for doing changes quicker. They need significant training/re-training of resources and strong management support to push through. For internal facing systems such as ERP if you are dealing with frequent system & requirement changes, you may want to look at replacing/upgrading the system itself to align it with the changed business context.
Thank you Dinesh for your inputs
Internal facing systems like ERP, or any systems which make an impact on Financial controls would need to follow the regulatory needs of the governing bod(y)ies where the country is registered and does business. Most of the world have adopted SOX and similar controls which do not give in too much of flexibility. In my experience ERPs if implemented in a planned manner won’t have frequent changes. If there is a need of frequent changes on the ERP on a regular basis you are on a path to failure or a significant financial losses as you have chosen a wrong ERP system or worse a wrong consultant to advice you.
Haven't found a solution?
This will mark this comment as best reply and close your question.
Are you sure?
This will close your question without a Best reply.
Are you sure?
This will report this content as inappropiate to the moderators.
Are you sure?