I mentioned in an earlier blog post that I recent attended the Scrum Alliance gathering in Orlando, Florida, USA. I won't revisit it, but I will tell you about an interesting Scrum Master that I met.

His name is Tobias Mayer, an agilest who was a skeptic (NOT a cynic, by the way) of our presence. He was legitimately worried about PMI's presence. However, after my remarks, he joined us for nearly 45 minutes sharing his pleasure with the commitment and the comments about PMI. It was a very rich discussion indeed. In fact, even though I didn't know him, I felt that our conversation was long overdue. It was as if we had started this conversation before but then waited until that day to continue it. Strange, yes, but it was a great conversation.

He said something that really rang a bell. He said that though Scrum addressed software development and project management, it was more about a value-based work framework, driving such values as respect for everyone's opinion and contribution to the project team, consistent and shared vigilance to risk, and more. He felt that it was developed not only to develop software faster and more effectively, but to provide a new culture of work, and new leadership values and principles. He particularly focused on the fact that it was a movement in the business world rooted in Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS). (Note: Relationship of CAS to business systems was an outgrowth of Complexity Theory, and before that Chaos Theory, pioneered by individuals such as M. Mitchell Waldrup and James Gleick. Tobias recommended Surfing on the Edge of Chaos by Richard   Also, I would check out the Santa Fe Institute for specific research on the subject.)

His point was really quite interesting. He made me think about the human involvement of project management and software development. In our congresses and through all of the literature, more space is being devoted to the "leader of the 21^st century." The leader has facilitation skills, employs team approaches to solve problems, and works well with and resolves conflict, engages more individuals to gain diversity of thought, and can bring convergence from such wide diversity. Clearly, our ideal leader is one who is far less hierarchical and autocratic, and believes in engagement as a way of doing business.

However, executives want PMs to possess business skills too. They expect individuals to be decisive and realistic, and understand the policies and politics of economic sustainability. And, above all, they want rigorous accountability and transparency.

Wow, it isn't too easy to meet both left and right brain requirements of the job today. But I think the point Tobias was making was that it requires a "culture" of engagement at the project level, and also to seek the right balance of discipline and accountability, with real solutions.

I really hope Tobias and I have time to talk again soon. As I said, he is one of those people that you realize you are overdue for a more in depth conversation.

More later.

I recently attended the Scrum Alliance Gathering in Orlando, Florida. I attended with Mark Langley, PMI Executive VP & COO at the urging of David Prior, Chair of the Board of the IT&T SIG. The intent of the visit was to bridge the gap between the Scrum Alliance and PMI. But I guess the real reason we attended was to dispel the myths that surround the PMBOK® Guide and Agile practice. There is a widely held opinion that the PMBOK® Guide and Agile don't mix... they can't be "shaken, nor stirred" together. It surprised me that such an opinion was held since the PMBOK® Guide - 4^th Edition recognizes Agile in several areas -  perhaps without direct attribution -  but nonetheless, it is recognized.

I could go into an explanation of agility, agile PM or Scrum, but if you are interested, you can find it on PMI.org, or search Google. My concern was the apparent misperception that the framework in the PMBOK® Guide - 4^th Edition is not applicable to "PM Agilests."

I went with an open mind and actually had it filled with great information and dialog. It was enlightening. We met with Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, the founders of the Scrum concepts, and Jim Cundriff, Managing Director of the Scrum Alliance. All were really receptive and eager for collaboration. Ken and Jeff in particular were striking in their passion for simplicity and agility, with fascinating backgrounds and rigor in the field of software development. They have committed their careers to speeding the development of software, and creating a PM movement that is based on iterative planning, speed, collaboration, and consistent vigilance to risk. They were definitely of the "explorer" variety and have done a lot to improving the speed to market for software development.

However, there was great anticipation among many Scrum gatherers that PMI was going to do something wrong. I accepted the fact that there were many who thought Mark's and my attendance was not a good sign, but rather a bellwether for competition and encroachment. It was based on skepticism, not cynicism, which is clearly not a bad thing...in fact, it might be a really good thing. Professional skepticism holds everyone accountable.

Well, my remarks were well received, and committed us to understanding one another and collaborating wherever we can. Many of the attendees really resonated on the desire to collaborate, and maybe recognized that there was a great deal of room to collaborate. The team of PMI volunteers that is putting together the new PMI Agile Forum was in attendance and was the driving force in getting us to attend the meeting. They too were energized.

There is no question that agile PM is a leading and emergent practice. It has great traction in software development and software installation. It is now moving into mainstream activities such as manufacturing in the telecommunications field. I was in Lima, Peru recently, and I spoke with many of the PM leaders there. Agile is on the move in Peru, where 60% of the GDP is driven out of small and medium sized companies. Agile approaches to PM are more the rule than the exception in these applications.

The movement in Extreme PM, Agile PM, and Scrum are movements which are critical to understand in reference with the standards developed by PMI. No doubt about it. And, the critical issue is to dispel myths and misunderstandings that would allow PM to prosper. There are zealots on both sides of the issue. In fact, I was as surprised of the number of PMI members who either misunderstood, or to the extreme, feared Scrum. So the issue is on both sides of the fence.

On the Scrum side, there was the perception that "the PMI way is incompatible with agile." And there is also a misperception that PMI "methodology" pushes against the movement of speed and agility in PM. Both sides of the proverbial fence share misunderstandings that needed correction.

I really hope the PM Agile Forum will clear this up and find a way to make PM continue to prosper to meet the needs of every organization. That just makes me crazy! I know that the PMBOK® Guide, at least the 4^th edition, is compatible with iterative planning, scalable WBS, etc. Yet, the misperceptions exists.

The issue that gets in the way of an agile approach seems less the issue of the PMBOK® Guide, but more the issue of organizational culture. High demands for accountability, detailed planning, extensive reporting, mechanistic approaches, and hierarchical controls, may very well be averse to an agile approach. Maybe, just maybe, there should be strategic principles and values that address management style, instead of viewing management, and in particular project management as a tactical approach for which someone else is responsible.

More later.