Always test the big assumptions

I saw someone post a picture today. It showed two boxers. One was called Agile. The other was called Plan. Agile was punching Plan.

Honestly, this is nonsense. Anyone who tells you that you do not need a plan, and that you only need Agile, is either short on real project experience or has become an Agile true believer.

I have seen the "we do not need plans" mindset creep into projects before. It does not end well. The better answer is this: talk in clear, simple English that a normal human being can understand.

Forget the word Agile for a moment. If you are leading a project, talk to your directors and the people commissioning the project about where they are uncertain. Then focus hard on reducing that uncertainty.

Key observations

The real issue is not Agile versus planning. The real issue is whether the project is learning enough, early enough, to make better decisions.

What are the big assumptions?

What should our learning goals be?

How much design do we need to do to give us more certainty?

How and when will we reflect on progress so we can reduce uncertainty?

How can we actively test the solution before we fully commit?

This still gives you a plan. But it is a plan to reduce uncertainty. And yes, that will usually make you more Agile.

Or in plain English: you are adapting because you are trying to learn, not because you are blindly sticking to a plan.

Always test the big assumptions.

Implication for the reader

Do not get trapped in method language. It rarely helps the people sponsoring, funding, or depending on the project.

Most directors do not need a lecture on Agile. They need to know where the uncertainty is, what the team is doing about it, and when the next evidence-based decision will be made.

A good plan should not pretend the future is fixed. A good plan should show how you will learn, test, adapt, and decide.