We all knew it

  • cheddar@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Today, new research conducted for a new book, Impact Engineering, has shown that 65% software projects adopting Agile requirements engineering practices fail to be delivered on time and within budget, to a high standard of quality. By contrast, projects adopting a new Impact Engineering approach detailed in a new book released today only failed 10% of the time.

    All you need to know about this study.

    • Simplicity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It almost sounds like a project team that is actually and actively looking to solve known and recurring problems instead of “just do whatever everyone else is kind of doing” might be why they are successful.

      It’s the difference between “how should we go about this” vs “see how we go” regardless of what you label those approaches as.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I think the take away should be:

        new research conducted for a new book, Impact Engineering,

        By contrast, projects adopting a new Impact Engineering approach detailed in a new book released today only failed 10% of the time.

        So the people who want to sell you ‘Impact Engineering’ say ‘Impact Engineering’ is better than Agile… Hardly an objective source.

        Even if they have success with their ‘Impact Engineering’ methodology, the second it becomes an Agile-level buzzword is the second it also becomes crap.

        The short of the real problem is that the typical software development project is subject to piss poor management, business planning, and/or developers and that piss poor management is always looking for some ‘quick fix’ in methodology to wave a wand and get business success without across the board competency.