There comes a point where more planning can not remove the remaining uncertainty, instead execution must be used to provide data and remove uncertainty.
This quote comes from a nicely argued case -- from the agile blog 'leading answers' -- for mixing agile methods in rather traditional businesses, like the oil and gas exploration/production business
If ever there was a business that benefits from Boehm's Spiral Model, OGM (oil, gas, minerals) is certainly one. (Disclosure: In the past, I've owned some OGM leases in Texas, so I've a bit of personal experience with this)
So, what have you got here?
- A lot of risk acknowledged up front (can't know everything -- thus the opening quote)
- A need to run with pilot projects before committing to production
- A need to tie into legacy systems (in the OGM case, distribution systems)
- A lot of deliverables that can be done incrementally and then integrated
- Small (it's all relative re small) teams, co-located (or the virtual version thereof), personally committed, with risk hanging on every move.
- A degree of local autonomy -- even if virtual -- required to meet the challenges of the moment
Of course, there's "one big thing":
You can't go around self-organizing (agile speak) willy-nilly! There are regulatory constraints everywhere and safety-first doctrine hanging on every move.
So, yes, there is a big bureaucracy that watches over... it's certainly more intrusive than a coach or a servant-leader (more agile speak) (I'm sure they never heard this stuff in an oil field or an offshore rig!). In fact, I'll bet the rig boss is a force to be reckoned with!
Agile in the Enterprise
So, the bureaucracy has to be reckoned with, aka, 'the enterprise'. To that point take a read of my post about 'agile in the enterprise', or better yet, take a look at my book, 'Project Management the Agile Way; Making it work in the Enterprise."
Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!
