The origins of motivation in the management of Agile and SCRUM
UPD from 08/18/2018: updated and simplified the text of the article
Agile is a project management concept based on flexibility and maximum adaptability to change. It can be said that the essence of the Ajail is in principle “to check and adapt”. It is possible and necessary to introduce small ready-made product milestones as often as possible, in order to understand whether exactly what the market and the consumer need is created — this is what agile calls for. Market and consumer needs analysis is often carried out to correct project development plans. Programmers write a project in short iterations, which allows business owners to check their business ideas “in battle”. Given that some features were needed yesterday, and the demands made last week were already outdated, then each project participant should always be ready for changes. Developers, like product owners, ideally understand the entire process of delivering a product to a consumer and the benefits it decides. Many people say that Agile works, some people believe that it has collected just the best software development practices, without creating anything new, but you can't deny that Agile works. This is proved by the histories of companies [1]
')
Historically, Agile is most often used in projects that are somehow related to information technology. For example, according to the results of a survey conducted by Scrumtek.ru, more than half of the surveyed companies are in one way or another connected with software development, even if this is not the main line of business [2].
The boom of startups has increased the popularity of flexible methodologies. The founder of a startup has some kind of business idea, most often associated with innovations, and he would like to implement it. However, the founder does not know some details, not everything is clear for him in terms of implementation, he has only a vision of a new product. At the same time, he wants to occupy the market niche sooner. In order to check whether a new idea will bring profit, it is important to “launch” as soon as possible and give the minimum suitable product to the client without spending a lot of resources. If the idea does not find a response, then the project is closed with minimal losses in both time and finance. If the project is a success with users, then the business develops through new investments in development. The same principle of “check and adapt” is applied in the further development of the project.
Big business can also apply the experience of startups: there is an idea, but there is no certainty that it will bring profit. What to do? Create MVP, analyze feedback and decide whether to continue this project. It is important to launch the product as early as possible in order to draw the right conclusions, otherwise you may become catching up with the departing train. Here managers and helps agile and product development with short iterations.
For newbies, I’ll write that iterative development is when programmers roll out updates over short periods of time, because analysts have come to the conclusion that this or that feature is needed by the client. This applies only to those companies that make the product to the general consumer, and not the one that is supplied to a limited circle of customers on request.
Business analysts also apply the principle of “check and adapt”, try to release the prototype as early as possible and collect feedback. Instead of presenting a fully completed product to customers through N number of months or years, the company releases small product updates to the market. The update should contain a valuable set of features for the client each iteration. If we compare it with a waterfall development, then the created product for ajaila after a time, comparable to its full sequential development without delivery iterations, has a set of functions that its users really need. Short deliveries of product versions allow the company to quickly adapt to changes.
In 2001, the development team created the so-called “Agile manifest”. Despite the fact that it contains in the text "software development", these rules can be attributed to any process of creating a new product [3]:
Agile management contributes to the development of competencies of participants in the development process. The project manager does not dictate the conditions for performing tasks, as in the case of Waterfall. Product Owner reveals user stories to developers at meetings, telling the problems that served their appearance. Developers, in turn, hear the background of the tasks, understand firsthand that customers will get the result of the task and better understand what needs to be done on it. This approach allows participants in the product creation process to understand that they all work for the same ultimate goal — a quality product for the company's customers.
The lack of a detailed description of the tasks gives more freedom and independence in making decisions directly to the team performing these tasks. In fact, each individual developer has the right to decide how to write a particular feature so that it satisfies the business requirements. Information about the business problem of the task complements the information about the task, and the programmer in the implementation process better sees the entire process chain. This may lead to the fact that the developer can offer his own vision of the solution of the product product problem. Products in turn give feedback on suggestions and results of the implementation of tasks. This is the essence of the “check and adapt” approach from the point of view of the task performers, not their directors.
Often, in large organizations, people responsible for certain stages of product creation are in very different, often conflicting, divisions. And if the product "does not work" and does not make a business profit, then everyone tries to blame the other. The tester blames the programmer for the bad code, the lead expert blames the bad code on the middle code review code, the analyst believes that he is not doing anything at all and that he “analyzed” everything properly. Although in fact in such cases, all are guilty [4]. Each project participant should rethink their role in the project from this point of view.
Business gets additional opportunities for growth, as the speed of operational tasks is accelerated due to greater independence of employees. With proper staff selection, task performers do not wait for management decisions on some operational issues, but try to solve them on their own. It is important that they have an understanding that these errors will not affect their work in the company, because will not bring big losses. People learn from their mistakes, their competencies expand. Business processes are accelerated due to the absence of the need to wait for the reception with the authorities to resolve minor issues.
The effectiveness of a person’s work depends on many factors, and motivation is considered one of the most important. The motivation of an employee depends on many things, and it is considered that only material remuneration is not a sufficient incentive to work [5]. Agile, in my opinion, is based on two popular theories of motivation: the Maslow needs theory and the F. Herzberg two-factor theory of motivation.
A. Maslow believed that motivation is based on the desire of a person to satisfy his needs. He identified five basic needs and arranged them in the following hierarchy, from basic to higher:
According to Maslow, people satisfy their needs consistently from basic to higher:
In the context of Agile, the project participants are considered to be highly qualified specialists whose physiological and safety needs are adequately met. It is believed that the person has already eaten and feels safe. The need to belong to a certain social group is satisfied by the close contact of developers and business customers. According to the rules of Agile, the task is only delegated to the performer, and a clearly written instruction is not given. This approach gives the performer some freedom in making decisions. The employee feels that he belongs to the group working on the project. His decisions, which find a response in the form of increased profits or customer satisfaction with the results of work, only reinforce these feelings.
The need for self-actualization is satisfied by the fact that project participants can express themselves fully, because they are given more freedom to make decisions. Strengthens the effect and the fact that feedback from the market due to iterations comes quickly. This makes it possible to adjust their principles of work, approaches and methods. Even if the task was zafakapili, it is a reason to analyze the causes of failure and try not to allow them in the future.
According to the two-factorial motivation theory of F. Herzeborg, “hygienic” and “motivating” factors influence motivation. ” "Hygienic"
These factors encourage the employee to return to work every morning.
"Motivating":
In other words, these are factors that encourage an employee to work better today than yesterday.
In my opinion, it is Agile that relies on motivating factors. Employees are independent in the performance of tasks, receive a high degree of responsibility for their affairs, and management encourages their good decisions through feedback. If something went wrong, then Agile recommends that managers clarify what the contractor’s mistake was and not blame and / or punish. This contributes to the development of a supporting leadership style, which is recognized as one of the most effective when working with highly qualified personnel [6]. If an employee makes a decision within his competence, and it has shown good results or the management has appreciated its benefit, then this motivates the employee to develop further in order to make more responsible decisions in the future.
Dan Ariely (Dan Ariely) is an Israeli-American professor of psychology and behavioral economics. He teaches at Duke University and is the founder of The Center for Advanced Hindsight. [7] Arieli conducted some experiments reflecting the importance of feedback when doing work. One of the most famous experiments is the assembly of the designer by people for money. The essence of the experiment is that the subjects are divided into two groups. Both groups of people assemble a designer from the provided parts for $ 3. After the man completed the assembly, he proceeded to build another designer, but for the price of thirty cents less. The question of the experiment was whether the person would stop collecting the constructor until the moment when he gets nothing for the assembly. The difference between the groups is that the assembled constructor for the subjects from the first group was removed into the box, and the result of the work of the subjects from the second group in their eyes was disassembled and given to them for reassembly at the next stage. On average, subjects from the first group, where the assembled designer was removed in a box, repeated the work 11 times, and participants from the second group - only 7. [8]
The results of the experiment show that people are not ready to do work until a certain payment threshold, if the result of this work is useless, and they know about it. The subjects from the second group were not ready to repeat the assembly of the designer for the eighth time on average, knowing that it would be disassembled and thrown away.
Similar experiments were carried out by Arieli and later. For example, instead of assembling a constructor, people were asked to mark on a sheet of chaotic set of letters those that stand side by side and form meaningful words. The subjects were divided into three groups, while the participants in the first group recorded their name on the answer sheet, but the participant in the other two did not. The results of the first group of the person conducting the experiment were evaluated in the eyes of the subjects and piled in a pile, allowing them to fill in another such sheet. The answers of the subjects of the second group were simply stacked without viewing. Answers of subjects of the third group without assessment were destroyed through a shredder before their eyes. The payment for filling in the sheet started from 30 cents, for each subsequent filling was paid 1 cent less. The results of the experiment were as follows: participants in the first group, whose answers were evaluated, stopped refilling at 15 cents on average, participants in the third group, whose answers were destroyed without evaluation, ended up at 28 cents, which is not surprising. But it was an amazing fact for those who conducted the experiment that the participants in the second group, whose answers did not subscribe and were not evaluated right there, stopped repetitive filling already at 26 cents. Ariely came to the conclusion that ignoring and depersonalizing the results of a person’s work is almost equivalent to the complete destruction of the fruits of the worker’s labor before his eyes. Reducing employee motivation is easy enough, and raising is hard.
Interesting experimental results with the participation of the same researcher show the questions of the influence of positive motivation. Michael Norton, together with Dan Arieli and several other scientists, described an experiment showing, as he calls it, the “IKEA effect”. The name of the effect comes from the business model of a Swedish company that manufactures furniture and supplies it as a designer for self-assembly by the client with the accompanying instructions.
As the scientist says, consumers of such products, requiring the participation of the client in bringing the product to a completed state, respond positively to the complication of the process of involvement. This is evidenced by a small study of the company "Betty Crocker", which at the end of the 50s of the last century decided to produce ready-made mixtures for baking, where the client only needed to pour the mixture into the form and put it in the oven for baking. According to the researchers, the target audience - housewives - did not begin to massively buy the product, although from an economic point of view, such a product was beneficial from the point of view of both financial investments and time costs. The company faced low sales. The leaders decided to exclude milk and eggs from the mixture, which involved consumers more in the process of making the cake - the housewife needed to add the missing components in the right proportions. There are no official data, but company representatives say that sales have increased several times. According to Norton and Arieli, consumers in the case of baking a fully prepared mixture could not feel that the finished cake was the fruit of their efforts, however, when it was necessary to mix the mixture with eggs and milk, it gave the housewives a sense of involvement in the making, and they could say : "This is my cake." They formulated such a conclusion: the more a person puts strength and soul into the work, the more he rejoices in the result [9].
To confirm this conclusion, the researchers conducted their own experiment with the participation of their students. They asked the subjects to fold the origami figurines out of paper using the instructions and paper lined up in advance and say at what price they would buy these crafts - their own and others'. Each time the result was the same: everyone was willing to pay more for their own figures. Moreover, people were so delighted with their figures that they were charged the same price as the work of professionals. Another participant was introduced into the experiment as a bystander, and at the end of the assembly he was also asked the question at what price he would have bought the collected origami. Naturally, the voiced values ​​were lower than those that were called the collectors themselves. The researchers got even more interesting results when they removed the instruction from the experiment, leaving only the lined paper and the photo of the expected finished result. Collected by origami, as the scientists note, were even worse and less resembled the expected result, but the prices voiced by the subjects were higher than in the first experiment. At the same time, outside observers called the price lower. Conclusion: consumers are ready to pay extra for the product from the “do it yourself” series, but with one important reservation: the task must be difficult enough for a person to be proud of the fruits of his labor, and at the same time not too difficult for him to do.
When working on an Agile project, the described “IKEA effect” is experienced by developers when working with tasks set by a business customer or manager without clear instructions for the sequence of actions, but with a clearly defined expected result. The performers believe that the modules they write are “their modules”, which increases the motivation for further work on the project.
The use of Agile requires managers and all project participants to rethink their role in the project and the goals of the work they do. In general, business is built around the idea of ​​making a profit through meeting the needs of its customers. In order to extract more profit, it is necessary to provide the client with more quality and relevant values. In order for the product being developed to be relevant to the consumer, it is necessary as often as possible to analyze the results of work on the project and adjust the plans, checking the feedback of the market in response to the supply of values.
Agile contributes to the development of workers and increase their motivation, encouraging independence in decision making. Agile also encourages project participants to openly discuss their tasks and emerging issues so that others can help. Open discussions can help a company not only in increasing the speed of delivering values ​​to customers, but also in streamlining and speeding up business processes. During teamwork discussions, participants may find that their work within a project can be started earlier than expected. Such a rethinking requires a lot of effort from each project participant, but if the principles of Agile are understood and accepted, the business will be as ready as possible for any changes in the external and internal environment.
Agile is a project management concept based on flexibility and maximum adaptability to change. It can be said that the essence of the Ajail is in principle “to check and adapt”. It is possible and necessary to introduce small ready-made product milestones as often as possible, in order to understand whether exactly what the market and the consumer need is created — this is what agile calls for. Market and consumer needs analysis is often carried out to correct project development plans. Programmers write a project in short iterations, which allows business owners to check their business ideas “in battle”. Given that some features were needed yesterday, and the demands made last week were already outdated, then each project participant should always be ready for changes. Developers, like product owners, ideally understand the entire process of delivering a product to a consumer and the benefits it decides. Many people say that Agile works, some people believe that it has collected just the best software development practices, without creating anything new, but you can't deny that Agile works. This is proved by the histories of companies [1]
')
The story of Agile
Historically, Agile is most often used in projects that are somehow related to information technology. For example, according to the results of a survey conducted by Scrumtek.ru, more than half of the surveyed companies are in one way or another connected with software development, even if this is not the main line of business [2].
The boom of startups has increased the popularity of flexible methodologies. The founder of a startup has some kind of business idea, most often associated with innovations, and he would like to implement it. However, the founder does not know some details, not everything is clear for him in terms of implementation, he has only a vision of a new product. At the same time, he wants to occupy the market niche sooner. In order to check whether a new idea will bring profit, it is important to “launch” as soon as possible and give the minimum suitable product to the client without spending a lot of resources. If the idea does not find a response, then the project is closed with minimal losses in both time and finance. If the project is a success with users, then the business develops through new investments in development. The same principle of “check and adapt” is applied in the further development of the project.
Big business can also apply the experience of startups: there is an idea, but there is no certainty that it will bring profit. What to do? Create MVP, analyze feedback and decide whether to continue this project. It is important to launch the product as early as possible in order to draw the right conclusions, otherwise you may become catching up with the departing train. Here managers and helps agile and product development with short iterations.
For newbies, I’ll write that iterative development is when programmers roll out updates over short periods of time, because analysts have come to the conclusion that this or that feature is needed by the client. This applies only to those companies that make the product to the general consumer, and not the one that is supplied to a limited circle of customers on request.
Business analysts also apply the principle of “check and adapt”, try to release the prototype as early as possible and collect feedback. Instead of presenting a fully completed product to customers through N number of months or years, the company releases small product updates to the market. The update should contain a valuable set of features for the client each iteration. If we compare it with a waterfall development, then the created product for ajaila after a time, comparable to its full sequential development without delivery iterations, has a set of functions that its users really need. Short deliveries of product versions allow the company to quickly adapt to changes.
Top Agile Rules
In 2001, the development team created the so-called “Agile manifest”. Despite the fact that it contains in the text "software development", these rules can be attributed to any process of creating a new product [3]:
- People and interaction is more important than processes and tools.
- A working product is more important than comprehensive documentation.
- Cooperation with the customer is more important than negotiating the terms of the contract
- Readiness for change is more important than following the original plan.
That is, without denying the importance of what is on the right, we still value more of what is on the left.
Impact of Agile on business processes
Agile management contributes to the development of competencies of participants in the development process. The project manager does not dictate the conditions for performing tasks, as in the case of Waterfall. Product Owner reveals user stories to developers at meetings, telling the problems that served their appearance. Developers, in turn, hear the background of the tasks, understand firsthand that customers will get the result of the task and better understand what needs to be done on it. This approach allows participants in the product creation process to understand that they all work for the same ultimate goal — a quality product for the company's customers.
The lack of a detailed description of the tasks gives more freedom and independence in making decisions directly to the team performing these tasks. In fact, each individual developer has the right to decide how to write a particular feature so that it satisfies the business requirements. Information about the business problem of the task complements the information about the task, and the programmer in the implementation process better sees the entire process chain. This may lead to the fact that the developer can offer his own vision of the solution of the product product problem. Products in turn give feedback on suggestions and results of the implementation of tasks. This is the essence of the “check and adapt” approach from the point of view of the task performers, not their directors.
Often, in large organizations, people responsible for certain stages of product creation are in very different, often conflicting, divisions. And if the product "does not work" and does not make a business profit, then everyone tries to blame the other. The tester blames the programmer for the bad code, the lead expert blames the bad code on the middle code review code, the analyst believes that he is not doing anything at all and that he “analyzed” everything properly. Although in fact in such cases, all are guilty [4]. Each project participant should rethink their role in the project from this point of view.
Business gets additional opportunities for growth, as the speed of operational tasks is accelerated due to greater independence of employees. With proper staff selection, task performers do not wait for management decisions on some operational issues, but try to solve them on their own. It is important that they have an understanding that these errors will not affect their work in the company, because will not bring big losses. People learn from their mistakes, their competencies expand. Business processes are accelerated due to the absence of the need to wait for the reception with the authorities to resolve minor issues.
Agile and staff motivation theory
The effectiveness of a person’s work depends on many factors, and motivation is considered one of the most important. The motivation of an employee depends on many things, and it is considered that only material remuneration is not a sufficient incentive to work [5]. Agile, in my opinion, is based on two popular theories of motivation: the Maslow needs theory and the F. Herzberg two-factor theory of motivation.
A. Maslow believed that motivation is based on the desire of a person to satisfy his needs. He identified five basic needs and arranged them in the following hierarchy, from basic to higher:
- Physiological needs, such as quenching hunger and thirst;
- The need for security, for example, the need for housing, heat, in order;
- The need for belonging and love, for example, the need to have a family, to be a member of a social group;
- The need for recognition, for example, the need for status, self-esteem;
- The need for self-actualization, for example, the need for personal growth and development.
According to Maslow, people satisfy their needs consistently from basic to higher:
“A person desires to satisfy a more basic of the two needs when he is not satisfied for both of them”.
In the context of Agile, the project participants are considered to be highly qualified specialists whose physiological and safety needs are adequately met. It is believed that the person has already eaten and feels safe. The need to belong to a certain social group is satisfied by the close contact of developers and business customers. According to the rules of Agile, the task is only delegated to the performer, and a clearly written instruction is not given. This approach gives the performer some freedom in making decisions. The employee feels that he belongs to the group working on the project. His decisions, which find a response in the form of increased profits or customer satisfaction with the results of work, only reinforce these feelings.
The need for self-actualization is satisfied by the fact that project participants can express themselves fully, because they are given more freedom to make decisions. Strengthens the effect and the fact that feedback from the market due to iterations comes quickly. This makes it possible to adjust their principles of work, approaches and methods. Even if the task was zafakapili, it is a reason to analyze the causes of failure and try not to allow them in the future.
According to the two-factorial motivation theory of F. Herzeborg, “hygienic” and “motivating” factors influence motivation. ” "Hygienic"
- working conditions;
- room;
- culture;
- company policy regarding internal processes;
- remuneration, bonuses, bonuses, etc.
These factors encourage the employee to return to work every morning.
"Motivating":
- success;
- career advancement;
- recognition of work results;
- high degree of responsibility;
- opportunity to realize their creative potential and professional growth.
In other words, these are factors that encourage an employee to work better today than yesterday.
In my opinion, it is Agile that relies on motivating factors. Employees are independent in the performance of tasks, receive a high degree of responsibility for their affairs, and management encourages their good decisions through feedback. If something went wrong, then Agile recommends that managers clarify what the contractor’s mistake was and not blame and / or punish. This contributes to the development of a supporting leadership style, which is recognized as one of the most effective when working with highly qualified personnel [6]. If an employee makes a decision within his competence, and it has shown good results or the management has appreciated its benefit, then this motivates the employee to develop further in order to make more responsible decisions in the future.
The role of feedback in matters of motivation
Dan Ariely (Dan Ariely) is an Israeli-American professor of psychology and behavioral economics. He teaches at Duke University and is the founder of The Center for Advanced Hindsight. [7] Arieli conducted some experiments reflecting the importance of feedback when doing work. One of the most famous experiments is the assembly of the designer by people for money. The essence of the experiment is that the subjects are divided into two groups. Both groups of people assemble a designer from the provided parts for $ 3. After the man completed the assembly, he proceeded to build another designer, but for the price of thirty cents less. The question of the experiment was whether the person would stop collecting the constructor until the moment when he gets nothing for the assembly. The difference between the groups is that the assembled constructor for the subjects from the first group was removed into the box, and the result of the work of the subjects from the second group in their eyes was disassembled and given to them for reassembly at the next stage. On average, subjects from the first group, where the assembled designer was removed in a box, repeated the work 11 times, and participants from the second group - only 7. [8]
The results of the experiment show that people are not ready to do work until a certain payment threshold, if the result of this work is useless, and they know about it. The subjects from the second group were not ready to repeat the assembly of the designer for the eighth time on average, knowing that it would be disassembled and thrown away.
Similar experiments were carried out by Arieli and later. For example, instead of assembling a constructor, people were asked to mark on a sheet of chaotic set of letters those that stand side by side and form meaningful words. The subjects were divided into three groups, while the participants in the first group recorded their name on the answer sheet, but the participant in the other two did not. The results of the first group of the person conducting the experiment were evaluated in the eyes of the subjects and piled in a pile, allowing them to fill in another such sheet. The answers of the subjects of the second group were simply stacked without viewing. Answers of subjects of the third group without assessment were destroyed through a shredder before their eyes. The payment for filling in the sheet started from 30 cents, for each subsequent filling was paid 1 cent less. The results of the experiment were as follows: participants in the first group, whose answers were evaluated, stopped refilling at 15 cents on average, participants in the third group, whose answers were destroyed without evaluation, ended up at 28 cents, which is not surprising. But it was an amazing fact for those who conducted the experiment that the participants in the second group, whose answers did not subscribe and were not evaluated right there, stopped repetitive filling already at 26 cents. Ariely came to the conclusion that ignoring and depersonalizing the results of a person’s work is almost equivalent to the complete destruction of the fruits of the worker’s labor before his eyes. Reducing employee motivation is easy enough, and raising is hard.
Interesting experimental results with the participation of the same researcher show the questions of the influence of positive motivation. Michael Norton, together with Dan Arieli and several other scientists, described an experiment showing, as he calls it, the “IKEA effect”. The name of the effect comes from the business model of a Swedish company that manufactures furniture and supplies it as a designer for self-assembly by the client with the accompanying instructions.
As the scientist says, consumers of such products, requiring the participation of the client in bringing the product to a completed state, respond positively to the complication of the process of involvement. This is evidenced by a small study of the company "Betty Crocker", which at the end of the 50s of the last century decided to produce ready-made mixtures for baking, where the client only needed to pour the mixture into the form and put it in the oven for baking. According to the researchers, the target audience - housewives - did not begin to massively buy the product, although from an economic point of view, such a product was beneficial from the point of view of both financial investments and time costs. The company faced low sales. The leaders decided to exclude milk and eggs from the mixture, which involved consumers more in the process of making the cake - the housewife needed to add the missing components in the right proportions. There are no official data, but company representatives say that sales have increased several times. According to Norton and Arieli, consumers in the case of baking a fully prepared mixture could not feel that the finished cake was the fruit of their efforts, however, when it was necessary to mix the mixture with eggs and milk, it gave the housewives a sense of involvement in the making, and they could say : "This is my cake." They formulated such a conclusion: the more a person puts strength and soul into the work, the more he rejoices in the result [9].
To confirm this conclusion, the researchers conducted their own experiment with the participation of their students. They asked the subjects to fold the origami figurines out of paper using the instructions and paper lined up in advance and say at what price they would buy these crafts - their own and others'. Each time the result was the same: everyone was willing to pay more for their own figures. Moreover, people were so delighted with their figures that they were charged the same price as the work of professionals. Another participant was introduced into the experiment as a bystander, and at the end of the assembly he was also asked the question at what price he would have bought the collected origami. Naturally, the voiced values ​​were lower than those that were called the collectors themselves. The researchers got even more interesting results when they removed the instruction from the experiment, leaving only the lined paper and the photo of the expected finished result. Collected by origami, as the scientists note, were even worse and less resembled the expected result, but the prices voiced by the subjects were higher than in the first experiment. At the same time, outside observers called the price lower. Conclusion: consumers are ready to pay extra for the product from the “do it yourself” series, but with one important reservation: the task must be difficult enough for a person to be proud of the fruits of his labor, and at the same time not too difficult for him to do.
When working on an Agile project, the described “IKEA effect” is experienced by developers when working with tasks set by a business customer or manager without clear instructions for the sequence of actions, but with a clearly defined expected result. The performers believe that the modules they write are “their modules”, which increases the motivation for further work on the project.
Finally
The use of Agile requires managers and all project participants to rethink their role in the project and the goals of the work they do. In general, business is built around the idea of ​​making a profit through meeting the needs of its customers. In order to extract more profit, it is necessary to provide the client with more quality and relevant values. In order for the product being developed to be relevant to the consumer, it is necessary as often as possible to analyze the results of work on the project and adjust the plans, checking the feedback of the market in response to the supply of values.
Agile contributes to the development of workers and increase their motivation, encouraging independence in decision making. Agile also encourages project participants to openly discuss their tasks and emerging issues so that others can help. Open discussions can help a company not only in increasing the speed of delivering values ​​to customers, but also in streamlining and speeding up business processes. During teamwork discussions, participants may find that their work within a project can be started earlier than expected. Such a rethinking requires a lot of effort from each project participant, but if the principles of Agile are understood and accepted, the business will be as ready as possible for any changes in the external and internal environment.
Sources
- Can Big Organizations Be Agile
- Report on the results of a survey of Russian companies in 2017
- “Agile software development manifest”, official website
- “Agile: how and when to apply this method”, Sergey Karpov
- “Management styles”, resource “Grandars.ru”
- "Theories of motivation", the resource "grandas.ru"
- Biography of Dan Arieli
- “Dan Ariely: Experiments with Employee Motivation,” an article about the experiment
- “The effect of IKEA - that I made, I loved”, the resource “Harvard Business Review” about the “effect of IKEA”
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/351242/
All Articles