1
00:00:08,900 --> 00:00:11,700
Welcome to the IPM. 
Podcast, OPM is the childhood 

2
00:00:11,700 --> 00:00:15,100
body for the project profession.
My name is Emma DeVito and I'm 

3
00:00:15,100 --> 00:00:18,000
the editor of project apm's 
quarterly journal, and your 

4
00:00:18,000 --> 00:00:20,700
host. 
And this podcast, I'm speaking 

5
00:00:20,700 --> 00:00:23,800
with Adrienne Duty, a long time 
project, professional, whose 

6
00:00:23,800 --> 00:00:26,600
views, and all things are Darlin
much in demand from the project 

7
00:00:26,600 --> 00:00:29,900
community in his 45 years, in 
project management. 

8
00:00:30,000 --> 00:00:31,800
Judgment. 
He tells me that he is seeing 

9
00:00:31,800 --> 00:00:35,500
many fads rise to prominence and
then become integrated into the 

10
00:00:35,500 --> 00:00:38,800
background of good practice. 
He believes our Joel will follow

11
00:00:38,800 --> 00:00:41,800
that same path. 
Just to give you a little bit of

12
00:00:41,800 --> 00:00:44,300
background and Adrian he started
out his career. 

13
00:00:44,300 --> 00:00:47,300
As a construction project 
manager, eventually becoming 

14
00:00:47,300 --> 00:00:50,600
involved in developing software 
applications for construction 

15
00:00:51,400 --> 00:00:54,800
in. 1984, he set up the projects
group as a training and 

16
00:00:54,800 --> 00:00:57,500
consultancy Company and all 
things related to project 

17
00:00:57,500 --> 00:01:00,500
management. 
Adrian was one of the Founders 

18
00:01:00,500 --> 00:01:03,700
of project manager today 
magazine and also served as an 

19
00:01:03,700 --> 00:01:07,400
executive council member of a 
p.m. he was lastly the lead 

20
00:01:07,400 --> 00:01:11,300
author of the sixth edition of 
opm's body of knowledge, Adrian 

21
00:01:11,300 --> 00:01:14,700
remains a non-executive director
of a PN group and is also the 

22
00:01:14,700 --> 00:01:18,500
founder and Lead author of the 
Praxis framework a free online 

23
00:01:18,500 --> 00:01:21,500
methodology body of knowledge 
and much more for project 

24
00:01:21,500 --> 00:01:23,500
program and portfolio 
management. 

25
00:01:30,900 --> 00:01:33,300
Welcome agent. 
Thanks for finding the time to 

26
00:01:33,300 --> 00:01:34,800
speak to us. 
Thank you, Emma. 

27
00:01:35,200 --> 00:01:37,200
You've been in the world of 
project management since the 

28
00:01:37,200 --> 00:01:42,500
1970s a long time and no doubt 
have seen many Trends come and 

29
00:01:42,500 --> 00:01:46,100
go, could you give us a bit of 
background and context and to 

30
00:01:46,100 --> 00:01:49,100
how agile might fit into this 
post? 

31
00:01:49,100 --> 00:01:50,900
40 years? 
Yeah. 

32
00:01:50,900 --> 00:01:54,200
Well, I've been I think about 
this a lot and I've been 

33
00:01:54,200 --> 00:01:59,200
pondering the various fads and 
Fashions. 

34
00:01:59,200 --> 00:02:03,900
I've seen come and go. 
And perhaps the one that is, is 

35
00:02:03,900 --> 00:02:08,400
foremost in my mind, is the one 
that I sort of found myself in, 

36
00:02:08,400 --> 00:02:12,300
when I, when I first joined the 
profession and in some respects,

37
00:02:12,300 --> 00:02:18,800
it feels as if that particular 
fashion led to the one, we have 

38
00:02:18,800 --> 00:02:25,200
at the moment with agile, it was
the very late 70s, and desktop 

39
00:02:25,200 --> 00:02:27,100
computers came along for the 
first time. 

40
00:02:27,100 --> 00:02:30,400
And those of us who were in 
planning and project, 

41
00:02:30,600 --> 00:02:33,200
Management. 
Saw this is a great opportunity 

42
00:02:33,200 --> 00:02:39,200
and lots of people around the UK
started developing software for 

43
00:02:39,300 --> 00:02:43,600
project scheduling so that they 
didn't have to send sheets off 

44
00:02:43,600 --> 00:02:48,300
to the bureau Mainframe. 
And wait for schedules to come 

45
00:02:48,300 --> 00:02:51,400
back usually with a typo in 
them, which made them completely

46
00:02:51,400 --> 00:02:54,400
wrong. 
So, we started developing this 

47
00:02:54,500 --> 00:02:57,800
localized software so you could 
sit in the site office and do 

48
00:02:57,800 --> 00:03:01,200
your scheduling there and then 
it was real time, and Grew and 

49
00:03:01,200 --> 00:03:05,300
grew and the use of desktop 
computers, grew, and grew. 

50
00:03:05,400 --> 00:03:08,300
And, and just to give one 
illustration of how that became 

51
00:03:08,300 --> 00:03:11,800
such a thing. 
I remember an advert which was 

52
00:03:11,800 --> 00:03:14,700
for something called super 
project and it was a box 

53
00:03:14,700 --> 00:03:17,900
because, you know, those days 
software came in boxes, on 

54
00:03:17,900 --> 00:03:22,000
floppy disks and a manual. 
And it was a box sitting on the 

55
00:03:22,000 --> 00:03:25,700
Mastermind chair, and the 
caption was the best project 

56
00:03:25,700 --> 00:03:28,400
manager you'll ever meet. 
Now, we'd laugh at that. 

57
00:03:28,400 --> 00:03:31,500
Now, you know, the idea that a 
boxer, so, Software can manage a

58
00:03:31,508 --> 00:03:34,200
project although maybe with a i 
it's getting there. 

59
00:03:34,200 --> 00:03:38,800
But in those days that was the 
hype around. 

60
00:03:38,800 --> 00:03:44,600
That particular tsunami of 
enthusiasm about the ability to 

61
00:03:44,600 --> 00:03:47,200
schedule projects locally on 
your desktop. 

62
00:03:47,500 --> 00:03:52,100
And I remember at the time, 
there was an enormous demand for

63
00:03:52,100 --> 00:03:56,400
those of us who had experience 
in scheduling mainly from 

64
00:03:56,400 --> 00:04:00,400
construction, from the IT 
industry and the it. 

65
00:04:00,600 --> 00:04:05,900
The street adopted this with 
gusto, I remember being called 

66
00:04:05,900 --> 00:04:07,900
into various organizations and 
they said, right? 

67
00:04:07,900 --> 00:04:11,800
This is this is what we're doing
and I'd say well, doesn't really

68
00:04:11,800 --> 00:04:15,300
apply to what you're doing, you 
know, I know it's a big thing 

69
00:04:15,400 --> 00:04:19,200
but this is not for you. 
This is this is not what you 

70
00:04:19,200 --> 00:04:23,500
should be or how you should be 
scheduling your projects and it 

71
00:04:23,500 --> 00:04:28,200
struck me on reflection that 
maybe that it's in some way. 

72
00:04:28,200 --> 00:04:30,400
It's the reaction against all 
that. 

73
00:04:30,500 --> 00:04:36,400
Hi type of project schedules 
which in some way led to the 

74
00:04:36,400 --> 00:04:38,400
opposite. 
Hype of. 

75
00:04:38,500 --> 00:04:40,800
No we don't need plans. 
We shouldn't have plans. 

76
00:04:40,800 --> 00:04:42,700
Everything has to be very, very 
flexible. 

77
00:04:43,400 --> 00:04:46,500
So in some ways you know the 
pendulum swings and one fashion 

78
00:04:46,800 --> 00:04:50,000
leads to an opposite fashion 
further down the line. 

79
00:04:51,100 --> 00:04:56,700
So agile came about at the turn 
of the Millennium and sauce that

80
00:04:56,700 --> 00:05:00,400
the agile Manifesto from a very 
specific part. 

81
00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:07,600
Of wild and if you know specific
sector industry, how has the 

82
00:05:07,600 --> 00:05:12,000
concept of agile changed since 
then since the agile Manifesto 

83
00:05:12,000 --> 00:05:16,900
came out and how has that 
morphed into something for the 

84
00:05:16,900 --> 00:05:22,400
world of project management? 
To use what we have to do is to 

85
00:05:22,400 --> 00:05:24,600
challenge some of the 
assumptions here. 

86
00:05:25,100 --> 00:05:30,700
So you're absolutely right was 
it 2001 its 17 software Ella 

87
00:05:30,700 --> 00:05:35,300
purrs got together in in a ski 
resort and said why we're going 

88
00:05:35,300 --> 00:05:39,500
to write this Manifesto and it 
was all about software 

89
00:05:39,500 --> 00:05:43,700
development and there's a 
perception that agile started 

90
00:05:43,700 --> 00:05:47,200
with the manifesto. 
If we drop the word agile from 

91
00:05:47,200 --> 00:05:51,500
moment and talk about agility, 
the ability to flex and be 

92
00:05:51,500 --> 00:05:57,400
adaptable on your projects, 
there are numerous examples and 

93
00:05:57,400 --> 00:06:00,400
case studies going back to the 
pantheon in Rome. 

94
00:06:01,000 --> 00:06:04,900
In the first century through 
Christopher wren's, Paul's 

95
00:06:04,900 --> 00:06:09,800
Cathedral where people have had 
to stop rethink. 

96
00:06:10,600 --> 00:06:13,400
Look again at the scope and head
off in a slightly different 

97
00:06:13,400 --> 00:06:15,400
direction that that's nothing 
new. 

98
00:06:15,600 --> 00:06:19,500
So I think agility has all 
always been there and never 

99
00:06:19,500 --> 00:06:22,200
another example, would be in the
80s. 

100
00:06:22,200 --> 00:06:24,400
I think. 
Probably late, 70s and 80s. 

101
00:06:25,100 --> 00:06:28,000
Concurrent engineering was very 
popular and concurrent 

102
00:06:28,000 --> 00:06:34,000
engineering is about. 
Self-managed multidisciplinary 

103
00:06:34,000 --> 00:06:38,300
teams. 
So to think that agile started 

104
00:06:38,300 --> 00:06:44,500
in 2001, the only thing that 
started in 2001 was the hype. 

105
00:06:45,600 --> 00:06:50,400
The agility was already there 
the agile Manifesto crystallized

106
00:06:50,400 --> 00:06:56,500
that perhaps as I suggested as a
reaction to how the software 

107
00:06:56,500 --> 00:07:00,100
industry had somewhat 
unthinkingly. 

108
00:07:00,700 --> 00:07:04,300
It's so much stuff from 
construction which wasn't 

109
00:07:04,700 --> 00:07:09,600
necessarily relevant, but it was
that Manifesto that started in 

110
00:07:10,000 --> 00:07:16,500
2001 and rapidly became 
something that I believe it 

111
00:07:16,500 --> 00:07:19,000
wasn't intended to be because of
the hype. 

112
00:07:20,100 --> 00:07:24,800
What did it become then? 
Almost like a cult, I'd agree 

113
00:07:24,800 --> 00:07:26,800
with you and I'm probably would 
drop the word. 

114
00:07:26,800 --> 00:07:32,300
Almost I think. 
Yes, it's It has become a cult. 

115
00:07:32,800 --> 00:07:37,700
One example of that, is that 
agile has become binary. 

116
00:07:38,300 --> 00:07:40,900
You know, when I talked about 
agility and flexibility, you're 

117
00:07:40,900 --> 00:07:43,300
talking about something which is
a Continuum. 

118
00:07:44,200 --> 00:07:46,900
There are different degrees of 
agility, different degrees of 

119
00:07:46,900 --> 00:07:50,300
flexibility. 
Whereas agile has become binary,

120
00:07:51,000 --> 00:07:53,500
sadly something I I do quite a 
bit. 

121
00:07:53,500 --> 00:07:56,500
He's monitor all the 
conversations on social media 

122
00:07:56,500 --> 00:08:01,600
about this and you keep getting 
these debates among People who 

123
00:08:01,600 --> 00:08:05,200
are in the agile Community 
saying, well that's agile. 

124
00:08:05,200 --> 00:08:07,800
That's not agile. 
Particularly when it comes to 

125
00:08:07,800 --> 00:08:11,100
trying to scale agile across an 
organization. 

126
00:08:11,300 --> 00:08:16,100
If you look at this stuff on 
social media, for example on 

127
00:08:16,100 --> 00:08:20,700
LinkedIn, you will find there is
quite a battle between the camps

128
00:08:20,700 --> 00:08:24,700
that say safe, the scale. 
Agile framework. 

129
00:08:24,700 --> 00:08:28,100
Safe is not agile and other 
people will say, well, yes it 

130
00:08:28,100 --> 00:08:29,800
is. 
It's scaled added agile. 

131
00:08:30,100 --> 00:08:33,600
You'll get People debating 
whether scrum is agile or not, 

132
00:08:34,100 --> 00:08:35,900
that's a slightly different kind
of argument. 

133
00:08:35,900 --> 00:08:40,299
But there are these quite heated
debates about. 

134
00:08:40,299 --> 00:08:42,500
What is agile? 
What is not agile? 

135
00:08:42,500 --> 00:08:46,700
It's become binary. 
And one of my observations is 

136
00:08:46,700 --> 00:08:49,400
that because people can't quite 
pin down. 

137
00:08:49,400 --> 00:08:53,600
What agile? 
Is they resort to the easier 

138
00:08:53,600 --> 00:08:56,800
thing of defining what it isn't?
And that's where waterfall comes

139
00:08:56,800 --> 00:09:00,500
from because if we can't agree, 
what agile is? 

140
00:09:00,600 --> 00:09:03,100
So let's talk about what it 
isn't. 

141
00:09:03,300 --> 00:09:06,000
We don't have a name for what it
isn't in the way that we have a 

142
00:09:06,008 --> 00:09:08,400
name for agile. 
So we need to create something 

143
00:09:08,700 --> 00:09:12,700
an antonym for agile. 
And that's where the term 

144
00:09:12,700 --> 00:09:16,700
waterfall comes from. 
And you will see some quite 

145
00:09:17,000 --> 00:09:22,800
prominent and respected. 
People will quote things about 

146
00:09:23,000 --> 00:09:27,800
waterfall or the other term that
they commonly uses traditional 

147
00:09:28,200 --> 00:09:31,300
project management. 
So there's this idea that there 

148
00:09:31,300 --> 00:09:33,800
is this traditional project 
management. 

149
00:09:33,800 --> 00:09:38,600
IE every project previous to 
2001 followed this traditional 

150
00:09:38,600 --> 00:09:43,300
approach and typically that is 
Is colloquially called waterfall

151
00:09:44,500 --> 00:09:49,200
and I read or I read a 
transcript to a presentation of 

152
00:09:49,200 --> 00:09:54,300
a professor at a university 
giving a talk about a case that 

153
00:09:54,300 --> 00:09:58,600
the case study was the Empire 
State Building and the comment 

154
00:09:58,600 --> 00:10:05,000
was you develop all these plans?
And if one resource goes sick or

155
00:10:05,000 --> 00:10:09,300
it starts to rain or your plans 
go out the window, Now that's 

156
00:10:09,300 --> 00:10:16,600
just crazy that's not the way it
works but the rigid rigid 

157
00:10:16,600 --> 00:10:19,800
waterfall approach which is you 
sit down. 

158
00:10:19,800 --> 00:10:22,800
You define everything. 
You produce an immutable plan 

159
00:10:22,800 --> 00:10:26,100
which can't change. 
And then you start delivering 

160
00:10:26,100 --> 00:10:32,200
according to that, plan is a 
say, a creation of people who 

161
00:10:32,200 --> 00:10:35,500
want to promote what they 
perceive as the opposite to 

162
00:10:35,500 --> 00:10:38,900
that. 
So you you you Can't have a 

163
00:10:38,908 --> 00:10:42,500
saint that doesn't have a dragon
to slay and we're agile, is the 

164
00:10:42,500 --> 00:10:46,700
saint waterfall and traditional 
are the dragons that it seeks to

165
00:10:46,900 --> 00:10:48,900
slay. 
So yes you're right. 

166
00:10:48,900 --> 00:10:53,100
It becomes very coltish out in 
the real world of projects. 

167
00:10:53,100 --> 00:10:56,500
It seems to me that people 
aren't so hung up on the 

168
00:10:56,500 --> 00:11:00,300
definition of a job. 
But just using what works and 

169
00:11:00,700 --> 00:11:04,100
there's two separate things here
really, there's the mindset of 

170
00:11:04,100 --> 00:11:08,400
agility, the approach of agility
which is what I'm understanding.

171
00:11:08,500 --> 00:11:11,300
Ending from this. 
And then this is whole host of 

172
00:11:11,300 --> 00:11:15,100
agile tools that have been 
described as a child known as 

173
00:11:15,100 --> 00:11:17,800
that. 
Other that in reality, I think 

174
00:11:17,800 --> 00:11:22,400
people adapt experiment with 
whatever makes things work. 

175
00:11:22,400 --> 00:11:26,100
And when I've interviewed 
project leaders, often they go 

176
00:11:26,100 --> 00:11:29,300
for what's now been turned a 
hybrid approach. 

177
00:11:30,400 --> 00:11:33,600
Which actually is to have a 
toolbox that filled with all the

178
00:11:33,600 --> 00:11:36,200
processes and techniques and 
everything you need from the way

179
00:11:36,200 --> 00:11:41,800
projects have been done to 
incorporate new tools and ways 

180
00:11:41,800 --> 00:11:44,700
of thinking, would you agree 
with that out in the real world 

181
00:11:44,700 --> 00:11:47,100
of projects? 
Is it about this idea of having 

182
00:11:47,100 --> 00:11:51,500
a hybrid approach? 
I think again there's two ways 

183
00:11:51,500 --> 00:11:55,300
I'd like to approach that 
question, firstly, the 

184
00:11:56,000 --> 00:12:00,100
difference between what I've 
seen referred to as the agile 

185
00:12:00,300 --> 00:12:03,900
Just real complex. 
There is this interlocking 

186
00:12:03,900 --> 00:12:09,300
system of Consultants trainers 
tool providers in the agile 

187
00:12:09,300 --> 00:12:13,900
space who are slightly detached 
from the people who are actually

188
00:12:13,900 --> 00:12:17,700
out there doing it and their 
interrelation their 

189
00:12:17,700 --> 00:12:21,100
interdependence on each other, 
just amplifies and amplifies the

190
00:12:21,100 --> 00:12:25,500
message. 
And it's interesting when I post

191
00:12:25,700 --> 00:12:31,200
on social media, about my views 
on on agile, I Will get. 

192
00:12:32,100 --> 00:12:38,000
I will get a lot of truly agile 
people saying, no, you're wrong.

193
00:12:38,000 --> 00:12:43,400
That's not the way it works. 
And even say, blocking me on 

194
00:12:43,400 --> 00:12:47,600
LinkedIn, because they don't 
agree with the points. 

195
00:12:47,600 --> 00:12:51,600
I'm making. 
All the good conversations I 

196
00:12:51,600 --> 00:12:54,600
have are with people who are 
actually out there doing it and 

197
00:12:54,600 --> 00:12:56,200
saying, well, it's not that 
black and white. 

198
00:12:56,500 --> 00:13:01,800
We as you quite rightly point 
out, we adapt to the context of 

199
00:13:01,800 --> 00:13:05,800
our project will use tools and 
techniques which some will call 

200
00:13:05,800 --> 00:13:11,000
our Joel, some will call 
waterfall Locker somewhere in 

201
00:13:11,000 --> 00:13:17,200
between and we will use those as
our project needs and those are 

202
00:13:17,200 --> 00:13:18,700
people are actually out there 
doing it. 

203
00:13:18,700 --> 00:13:26,200
So this is Act between the layer
which depend on the hype, and 

204
00:13:26,200 --> 00:13:28,000
the layer that are just trying 
to do a job. 

205
00:13:28,600 --> 00:13:33,000
Now, when we then what that 
leads to and I think again, this

206
00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:38,900
comes from the, if you like the 
agile Elite to the agile cult, 

207
00:13:38,900 --> 00:13:42,900
The Druids of agile, observing 
the people who are actually out 

208
00:13:42,900 --> 00:13:47,100
there doing it and say, ah, 
they're not totally agile, 

209
00:13:47,100 --> 00:13:50,400
they're not totally waterfall. 
So we'll call This hybrid. 

210
00:13:50,600 --> 00:13:53,200
Now my view on that is that if 
you look up the dictionary 

211
00:13:53,200 --> 00:13:57,000
definition of hybrid, which I 
haven't memorized, it is a 

212
00:13:57,000 --> 00:14:03,200
combination of two things by 
definition, the two things have 

213
00:14:03,200 --> 00:14:05,200
to exist in order to have a 
hybrid. 

214
00:14:05,500 --> 00:14:09,100
Now, my argument is that 
waterfall stroke traditional, 

215
00:14:09,100 --> 00:14:11,500
definitely doesn't exist and 
never did. 

216
00:14:11,800 --> 00:14:17,600
And agile is just one extreme if
the Continuum of agility. 

217
00:14:18,700 --> 00:14:23,700
So if you don't have Waterfall 
and agile is just a view, a 

218
00:14:23,708 --> 00:14:27,500
superficial view of the 
underlying practice. 

219
00:14:27,500 --> 00:14:30,700
Then how can you have a hybrid 
of those two things for me, 

220
00:14:30,700 --> 00:14:37,600
hybrid is the acceptable face of
the mistake that was made. 

221
00:14:38,900 --> 00:14:46,100
To make agile and waterfall 
these two polarizing positions. 

222
00:14:48,000 --> 00:14:52,500
What advice have you got for 
project professionals, who are 

223
00:14:52,500 --> 00:14:55,600
aware of all of this going on 
and aware of our child. 

224
00:14:55,600 --> 00:14:59,300
And perhaps thinking that that 
means a specific thing that they

225
00:14:59,300 --> 00:15:04,300
need to be doing practically and
with your longer view. 

226
00:15:04,600 --> 00:15:09,500
What advice would you give to 
them about agile to promote the 

227
00:15:09,500 --> 00:15:16,800
right way of thinking, my advice
would be stop thinking in terms 

228
00:15:16,800 --> 00:15:20,500
of agile. 
And waterfall think in terms of 

229
00:15:20,500 --> 00:15:26,000
the Continuum of agility. 
It's going to sound very nerdy 

230
00:15:26,000 --> 00:15:29,000
when I say that a Giles and 
adjectives and Agility as a 

231
00:15:29,008 --> 00:15:35,500
noun. 
But yeah, Joel originally was a 

232
00:15:35,600 --> 00:15:40,300
was an adjective to describe to 
qualify something you're doing 

233
00:15:40,800 --> 00:15:43,100
so agile. 
Project management would have 

234
00:15:43,100 --> 00:15:46,500
been I'm managing my project 
with agility. 

235
00:15:48,200 --> 00:15:51,600
When it became a noun, when it 
became a thin, that's when it 

236
00:15:51,600 --> 00:15:55,100
became binary, you're either 
agile, you're not. 

237
00:15:56,400 --> 00:16:00,100
So we've got to get rid of that.
We somehow got to get away from 

238
00:16:00,100 --> 00:16:03,100
that kind of thinking, and I 
believe strongly. 

239
00:16:04,900 --> 00:16:08,600
Foot when we talking about how 
we want to manage our projects 

240
00:16:08,600 --> 00:16:13,100
and our programs, we should be 
talking about agility because 

241
00:16:13,100 --> 00:16:18,400
that gives us a whole spectrum 
of approaches that we can take 

242
00:16:18,600 --> 00:16:21,900
and not just on a 
project-by-project basis but on 

243
00:16:22,200 --> 00:16:27,200
different parts of the project 
actually lists talk about agile 

244
00:16:27,200 --> 00:16:30,900
projects and waterfall projects.
Well for anybody out there who's

245
00:16:30,900 --> 00:16:32,900
worked on an engineering 
project. 

246
00:16:34,200 --> 00:16:37,300
Yes, if you're going to build a 
bridge, you've got to have the 

247
00:16:37,300 --> 00:16:39,900
full requirements and 
specification done before you 

248
00:16:39,900 --> 00:16:42,300
start digging holes in the 
ground, otherwise you've got, 

249
00:16:42,400 --> 00:16:46,400
you're going to have problems. 
But that design work in the 

250
00:16:46,400 --> 00:16:50,600
design, in the early stages of 
the project will have been done 

251
00:16:50,600 --> 00:16:58,300
in a very agile way or to use my
preferred way of saying it will 

252
00:16:58,300 --> 00:17:00,200
have been done with great 
agility. 

253
00:17:01,000 --> 00:17:05,099
There will have been 
multi-disciplinary teams going 

254
00:17:05,099 --> 00:17:09,099
through multiple iterations of 
the design working with the 

255
00:17:09,099 --> 00:17:16,300
client working with stakeholders
to gradually come to the design,

256
00:17:16,400 --> 00:17:20,700
which is going to be built, so 
you can have great agility in 

257
00:17:21,000 --> 00:17:24,800
the design phases. 
Phases of a project and very low

258
00:17:24,800 --> 00:17:29,100
agility in the latter, phases of
the project, because ultimately 

259
00:17:29,100 --> 00:17:34,800
the, the ability to be agile, 
The ability to to apply agility 

260
00:17:35,200 --> 00:17:40,100
is down to the cost of change. 
And that comes back to where 

261
00:17:40,100 --> 00:17:44,500
this all came from, which was 
software development in software

262
00:17:44,500 --> 00:17:47,400
development. 
If you want to change a feature,

263
00:17:47,400 --> 00:17:51,700
you rewrite the code. 
Clearly there's a cost to that. 

264
00:17:53,000 --> 00:17:56,100
If you're halfway through 
building a bridge and you want 

265
00:17:56,100 --> 00:17:59,200
to change the design, the cost 
of change is enormous. 

266
00:18:01,000 --> 00:18:04,600
So within any project there are 
there are elements of the 

267
00:18:04,600 --> 00:18:07,200
project. 
There are phases of the project 

268
00:18:07,200 --> 00:18:11,400
where the cost of change is low,
and that's where you can apply 

269
00:18:11,400 --> 00:18:14,700
great agility and there are 
areas of the project where the 

270
00:18:14,700 --> 00:18:18,000
cost of change is very high and 
that's where it's very 

271
00:18:18,000 --> 00:18:20,100
difficult. 
Well by definition, very 

272
00:18:20,100 --> 00:18:25,900
expensive to apply changes. 
So my advice to people is think 

273
00:18:25,900 --> 00:18:30,700
in terms of agility, think in 
terms of how different projects,

274
00:18:30,700 --> 00:18:35,300
different parts of your project 
can make use of agility and 

275
00:18:35,300 --> 00:18:38,200
flexibility and then apply the 
relevant. 

276
00:18:38,200 --> 00:18:42,000
Approaches to those different 
projects different parts of 

277
00:18:42,000 --> 00:18:47,100
those projects just please 
please please get away from this

278
00:18:47,500 --> 00:18:52,500
mentality that there's red which
is agile. 

279
00:18:53,200 --> 00:18:57,700
Indigo, which is waterfall and 
all the other colors of the 

280
00:18:57,700 --> 00:19:03,800
rainbow in between don't exist. 
All the idea that hybrid is not 

281
00:19:03,800 --> 00:19:07,000
the colors in between hybrid is 
just a mixture of red and 

282
00:19:07,000 --> 00:19:10,200
indigo. 
So as sort of a muddy gloopy 

283
00:19:11,700 --> 00:19:16,600
Bluey read, you know, it's just 
need to open our minds to this 

284
00:19:16,600 --> 00:19:21,700
spectrum of agility. 
Where are we now with agile? 

285
00:19:22,000 --> 00:19:25,000
We've got past the hype. 
It's not idea that's been 

286
00:19:25,000 --> 00:19:27,800
maturing in the world of 
business and projects and 

287
00:19:27,800 --> 00:19:30,300
Beyond. 
Where do you think it's heading?

288
00:19:30,700 --> 00:19:35,000
Now own particularly from the 
world of project management, a 

289
00:19:35,000 --> 00:19:37,500
good Bridge just briefly going 
back to the manifesto. 

290
00:19:37,500 --> 00:19:43,500
I think what that did was to 
crystallize and formalize, some 

291
00:19:43,500 --> 00:19:47,000
of the good ideas that were out 
there or L, help the 

292
00:19:47,000 --> 00:19:50,900
formalization of the ideas. 
That are out there so you know, 

293
00:19:50,900 --> 00:19:54,100
I'm not trying to I don't want 
to come across as an antique. 

294
00:19:55,000 --> 00:19:56,600
Well, I suppose I am Auntie 
agile. 

295
00:19:56,600 --> 00:20:01,300
What I'm not is anti agility and
I think the manifesto and some 

296
00:20:01,300 --> 00:20:05,800
of the stuff around that has 
done a lot to help boost and 

297
00:20:05,800 --> 00:20:09,200
understanding of agility in 
project management. 

298
00:20:09,500 --> 00:20:15,600
So I think that ultimately the 
profession is better for a lot 

299
00:20:15,600 --> 00:20:17,600
of this discussion about 
agility. 

300
00:20:19,400 --> 00:20:25,800
And I think the next phase that 
we have to work through, is a 

301
00:20:25,800 --> 00:20:31,000
lot of those ideas about 
agility, just being absorbed and

302
00:20:31,000 --> 00:20:35,500
becoming part of the profession.
So we don't talk about them as 

303
00:20:35,500 --> 00:20:40,100
being some separate way of 
managing projects. 

304
00:20:40,500 --> 00:20:44,200
We just see them as a natural 
component of managing projects. 

305
00:20:44,600 --> 00:20:48,500
They are part of the project 
managers tool kit. 

306
00:20:49,200 --> 00:20:52,200
When they come to deciding what 
tools are best for their 

307
00:20:52,200 --> 00:20:57,500
particular project. 
Now I think again to to to draw 

308
00:20:57,500 --> 00:21:01,800
another business analogy who 
talks about business process 

309
00:21:01,800 --> 00:21:06,100
engineering anymore. 
But what does it was that was it

310
00:21:06,100 --> 00:21:09,600
Mike Hammer published an article
in the. 

311
00:21:10,500 --> 00:21:12,900
I don't know, the Wall Street 
Journal or the Harvard Business 

312
00:21:12,900 --> 00:21:16,300
review or something. 
And all of a sudden everybody 

313
00:21:16,300 --> 00:21:19,600
was talking about business 
process re-engineering, And then

314
00:21:19,600 --> 00:21:23,300
it disappeared. 
Did it disappear or did it just 

315
00:21:23,300 --> 00:21:27,100
get absorbed into the general 
mindset? 

316
00:21:27,200 --> 00:21:31,700
You know, I think when people 
talk about digital 

317
00:21:31,700 --> 00:21:36,200
transformation now, You think 
well, how much of digital 

318
00:21:36,200 --> 00:21:38,700
transformation is just business 
process? 

319
00:21:38,700 --> 00:21:42,000
Re-engineering? 
In a digital world. 

320
00:21:43,000 --> 00:21:47,800
And in a way, these labels are 
kind of a handy way of exactly 

321
00:21:47,800 --> 00:21:52,800
what he says or crystallizing 
the kind of zeitgeist or a shift

322
00:21:52,800 --> 00:21:56,100
in the way we think about things
often the way we think about 

323
00:21:56,100 --> 00:21:58,900
business or the way we think 
about projects which is going to

324
00:21:58,908 --> 00:22:02,000
leave me to ask you another 
another question. 

325
00:22:02,200 --> 00:22:05,200
But already people are asking 
what is beyond agile? 

326
00:22:05,500 --> 00:22:07,900
What is after, what comes after 
our child? 

327
00:22:09,000 --> 00:22:12,700
Probably four months ago. 
I wouldn't have known how to 

328
00:22:12,700 --> 00:22:19,800
answer that question. 
Now I'm going to say a I you 

329
00:22:19,800 --> 00:22:25,600
know we're all every people 
talking about AI for years I 

330
00:22:25,600 --> 00:22:30,700
remembers when I first got 
involved in software development

331
00:22:30,900 --> 00:22:33,900
I wish I still had it but I 
remember buying a book on 

332
00:22:34,000 --> 00:22:37,400
artificial intelligence. 
Most of it was sort of a bit 

333
00:22:37,400 --> 00:22:42,100
over-the-top and and primarily 
it was just about well I 

334
00:22:42,100 --> 00:22:44,800
remember an article in a 
magazine if I can get this. 

335
00:22:45,000 --> 00:22:48,900
This quote, quite right there 
was two two phrases. 

336
00:22:48,900 --> 00:22:57,700
It was time flies like an arrow 
fruit flies, like a banana, how 

337
00:22:57,700 --> 00:23:01,300
do you explain to artificial 
intelligence the difference 

338
00:23:01,300 --> 00:23:07,000
between those two sentences So 
the the thinking about 

339
00:23:07,000 --> 00:23:10,800
artificial intelligence has been
around since Turing. 

340
00:23:10,800 --> 00:23:15,900
Proposed his famous test. 
What has happened in the last 

341
00:23:15,908 --> 00:23:20,700
four months is chat GPT all of a
sudden. 

342
00:23:20,700 --> 00:23:24,700
Every other post in LinkedIn is 
about chat GPT. 

343
00:23:24,700 --> 00:23:33,200
And what I see happening again 
is loads and loads of hype and 

344
00:23:33,200 --> 00:23:38,000
I've Played with it in a very 
amateurish way and it does feel 

345
00:23:38,000 --> 00:23:41,900
like it brings back. 
Those feelings from 40 years 

346
00:23:41,900 --> 00:23:44,400
ago, when we first had desktop 
computers. 

347
00:23:45,100 --> 00:23:47,700
What do you mean? 
We're like, excitement or yes. 

348
00:23:47,800 --> 00:23:51,100
Yes excitement in that. 
This is life-changing. 

349
00:23:51,200 --> 00:23:53,300
Well this is this is world 
changing. 

350
00:23:54,400 --> 00:24:00,600
But at the moment, it's very 
clunky and the danger is that 

351
00:24:01,300 --> 00:24:06,200
people get to in You see a stick
about the clunky version? 

352
00:24:07,500 --> 00:24:10,000
In terms of, it's finished its 
here. 

353
00:24:11,000 --> 00:24:13,600
Rather than saying, why, this is
a great start. 

354
00:24:13,700 --> 00:24:15,400
Where can we take this in the 
future? 

355
00:24:16,500 --> 00:24:19,600
So the hype says, it's here, 
it's great, you've got to use it

356
00:24:19,600 --> 00:24:23,100
now. 
The more balanced approach says,

357
00:24:23,400 --> 00:24:25,700
okay, let's let's have a look at
this. 

358
00:24:25,700 --> 00:24:28,100
This is good. 
This is bringing a lot of stuff 

359
00:24:28,100 --> 00:24:30,600
together. 
I can see this has opportunities

360
00:24:31,300 --> 00:24:35,500
but it's got to improve a lot 
and I'm sure it will over the 

361
00:24:35,500 --> 00:24:40,000
next few years. 
So again, it's this danger of 

362
00:24:40,200 --> 00:24:44,200
hyping it up too soon already 
people are talking about as 

363
00:24:44,200 --> 00:24:48,000
possible application to the 
World of projects is that is 

364
00:24:48,000 --> 00:24:51,200
that something you're willing to
put your you know gives a give 

365
00:24:51,200 --> 00:24:57,100
us some views on? 
I think it's early days my view 

366
00:24:57,100 --> 00:25:02,200
of that particular tool chat GPT
is governed by the fact that if 

367
00:25:02,200 --> 00:25:05,900
I if I put a question in about 
something I'm not very familiar 

368
00:25:05,900 --> 00:25:11,200
with, I get a very convincing 
very eloquent answer. 

369
00:25:12,200 --> 00:25:14,500
That makes me too. 
Alright, that's how it works. 

370
00:25:15,000 --> 00:25:18,000
If I put a question in about 
something that I'm very, very 

371
00:25:18,000 --> 00:25:21,600
familiar with Did I get an 
answer back? 

372
00:25:22,500 --> 00:25:24,800
Particularly if you put in 
questions about agile and 

373
00:25:24,800 --> 00:25:28,700
waterfall, what we'll what 
you'll get back is very 

374
00:25:28,700 --> 00:25:32,400
eloquent. 
Very convincing answers based on

375
00:25:33,300 --> 00:25:35,900
information. 
It's scraped from the web, which

376
00:25:35,900 --> 00:25:37,800
I would say, is completely 
wrong. 

377
00:25:38,200 --> 00:25:42,300
So, one of the things that I 
think AI has to do is get to the

378
00:25:42,300 --> 00:25:46,400
point where it can somehow make 
a judgment about what is good 

379
00:25:46,400 --> 00:25:48,300
information on what is bad 
information. 

380
00:25:49,300 --> 00:25:52,200
I don't think it could well I'm 
but I'm pretty sure it can't do 

381
00:25:52,200 --> 00:25:55,200
that at the moment. 
So when you start to see 

382
00:25:55,200 --> 00:25:57,800
statements like all project 
managers are going to be out of 

383
00:25:57,800 --> 00:26:01,500
a job in 3 years because we're 
just going to get AI to manage 

384
00:26:01,500 --> 00:26:02,500
the projects while. 
Yeah. 

385
00:26:02,500 --> 00:26:07,600
Come on, be serious. 
This is a this is another tool 

386
00:26:08,800 --> 00:26:12,000
which is going to help. 
We've got to work out how to use

387
00:26:12,000 --> 00:26:14,200
it. 
We've got to work out how to 

388
00:26:14,200 --> 00:26:18,900
understand it and then we've got
a build it in. 

389
00:26:19,100 --> 00:26:24,300
In to the way we manage our 
projects but let's be very very 

390
00:26:24,300 --> 00:26:28,700
careful about not getting too 
excited too soon because then 

391
00:26:28,700 --> 00:26:31,700
we're just repeating what 
happened with scheduling 

392
00:26:31,700 --> 00:26:37,800
software in the early 80s when 
people people's attitude was you

393
00:26:37,800 --> 00:26:40,500
know the answer is your 
scheduling software. 

394
00:26:40,500 --> 00:26:44,600
What's the question? 
And 30 years later, it was all 

395
00:26:44,600 --> 00:26:45,500
the answers. 
Agile. 

396
00:26:45,500 --> 00:26:48,700
What's the question? 
Let's not start doing the 

397
00:26:48,700 --> 00:26:50,600
answers. 
AI, what's the question? 

398
00:26:51,300 --> 00:26:55,800
Any leaving? 
Thoughts for listeners about 

399
00:26:55,800 --> 00:27:00,800
agile and Agility? 
And I know it sounds like a very

400
00:27:00,800 --> 00:27:09,400
pedantic grammatical point, but 
it is actually just the surface 

401
00:27:09,400 --> 00:27:14,500
presentation of a change in 
mindset, which is, we need to 

402
00:27:14,500 --> 00:27:19,500
think about agility. 
Which is a Continuum, a spectrum

403
00:27:19,500 --> 00:27:24,600
of different degrees of agility 
and stop talking about binary 

404
00:27:24,600 --> 00:27:30,300
Concepts like agile. 
And definitely opposing binary 

405
00:27:30,300 --> 00:27:32,200
Concepts like agile and 
waterfall. 

406
00:27:33,400 --> 00:27:39,900
Take a more relaxed considered 
holistic view of these things 

407
00:27:40,300 --> 00:27:43,500
and don't get wrapped up in the 
hype and the jargon. 

408
00:27:43,900 --> 00:27:46,700
Okay, Asian great way to end 
this podcast. 

409
00:27:46,700 --> 00:27:49,000
So we've, we've covered a lot of
ground there. 

410
00:27:50,500 --> 00:27:52,400
Thank you so much for your time 
again. 

411
00:27:52,800 --> 00:27:54,700
Thank you very much, Emma. 
It's been great fun. 

412
00:28:00,600 --> 00:28:03,000
Thanks again to Adrienne for 
joining us and to you for 

413
00:28:03,000 --> 00:28:06,300
listening to the OPM podcast. 
Don't forget to look out for 

414
00:28:06,300 --> 00:28:09,300
more episodes or to rate and 
review as wherever you get your 

415
00:28:09,300 --> 00:28:11,800
podcasts. 
We welcome you to get in touch 

416
00:28:11,800 --> 00:28:15,400
with your comments feedback and 
suggestions by e-mailing us at a

417
00:28:15,400 --> 00:28:19,000
p.m. podcast at think publishing
.co.uk. 

418
00:28:19,700 --> 00:28:23,200
This podcast has been brought to
you by APM to chartered body for

419
00:28:23,200 --> 00:28:27,300
the project profession for More 
information on a p.m. visit, a 

420
00:28:27,300 --> 00:28:29,000
PM. 
Org.uk.