The agile community seems to be searching for itself at the moment, is success suffocating it?

Between the great thinkers who are sometimes too little confronted with reality, and the predators who have smelled the scent of fresh money (agile is a buzz! so it’s also cash!), everyone is trying to position themselves and occupy the terrain (on the French side I see an institute flourishing, a federation, this could be worrying. I’m not throwing stones, all these bodies probably start from a good idea and surely have -without irony- an avowable goal. By the way agile-academie.com and .fr are available, go for it!! -with irony-).

So we’re witnessing a positioning war of which certification is probably the most visible face. Observation: agile certification has no real meaning: either you spend 2 days (more than 1000 euros) with an agile coach and you automatically obtain the certification (ScrumAlliance), or you pay 100 euros and you have the right to take a multiple choice test to get a certification (scrum.org).

So yes it’s bad because we end up with quite a few people who have no real field experience and who are certified. But does this differ from other certifications? well no, not really in my eyes. Does it have value: very little but not nothing (I spent time -2 days- with an agile coach, or I immersed myself in the manual (20 pages) from scrum.org with a multiple choice test at the end); that’s already a difference whether some people like it or not. The problem is rather that some grant themselves the right to award certification, and that others don’t have this privilege.

Should we blame someone? The one who abuses the system by certifying left and right or the one who only employs “certified” people knowing that this certification has little value? I opt for the buyer. Without demand, no supply… Nevertheless it’s understandable that one would want to ensure the skills of the people being hired or with whom one will work. However it seems obvious to me that buyers must make an effort regarding their recruitment.

Is it possible to certify in agile? No less than in other domains. Does it make sense? I’m less convinced. The human side, conceptual, contextual play a strong role, how then to propose a check list allowing validation of the agile knowledge of some and industrialize (argh) that…

So should we certify agile anyway and how? I would base myself on the CMMi model (which I knew well). I would certify an organization, an entity, and not a person, and at regular intervals. Continuing this parallel with CMMi, instead of practices I would evoke the principles and values and I would leave the entity free to embrace them as it wishes. But I’m only pushing back the problem (clearly visible on the CMMi side): who??? has the privilege to certify…

And so we fall back on the current wanderings of the “agile community”: is outrageous pragmatism needed (even if it means running the money machine), or should we launch into long diatribes about cultural change, the human side, etc… which sometimes smack of charlatanism or belief. By the way, both aren’t so bad, negative. Yes it’s beautiful and good to defend an ideal, a philosophy (even if clients aren’t necessarily looking for that…well a happy employee is a good employee). Secondly I see no harm in making money with agile. You have to make money, if on top of that you can do it by doing what you love…

There’s a strong pull. But it’s also a good sign, these heated discussions, these oppositions.

And, to soften my post, from my humble point of view, there is a path in the middle and the majority of people I observe seem to choose it.

Ah I note that agile-certification is available in .fr (gentlemen fire first).

A very good article on the problems raised by agile certification:

http://xprogramming.com/articles/csm-certification-thoughts/

The facts overwhelm me:

a) I’m joining the pack concerning agile certif b) I’m certified c) I make money with agile