Many versions of this Zen parable exist. They all boil down to the same moral: People who are unable to set aside their preconceptions and prejudices, who are wrapped up in what they know or think they know, shut themselves off from new knowledge and insights. Often, as we navigate through our lives accumulating knowledge, experiences, and developing points of view about everything, we reach a point where the boundaries of our mental models harden and our thinking becomes similarly sclerotic. In that state, we immediately reject or subconsciously distort anything that challenges our understanding. To truly learn, we must be prepared to understand new concepts on their own terms before interjecting our own perspectives. We must empty the cup so we may taste the new tea.
This parable is not an appeal to suspending critical thinking or disregarding previously acquired education, training, and experience. Indeed, those attributes are critical to the ability to learn new concepts and effectively apply them in the real world. It is a defense of a true open-mindedness that seeks to fully understand unfamiliar ideas before casting judgement on them or attempting to change them to fit preconceived notions or entrenched habits of mind.
“Hybrid Agile”
Most Federal Government Agile system development efforts are really “Scrumfall” implementations, where software development teams perform Agile-Scrum practices/activities within a Waterfall program management structure. This Agile anti-pattern is often colloquially referred to in the Federal Government as “Hybrid Agile.”
Hybrid Agile is not a recognized software/systems development approach. It is an ill-conceived and counterproductive approach to Agile rooted in federal acquisitions culture rather than in proven software/systems engineering practices. It is an attempt to gain the benefits of Agile while avoiding internalizing and applying the “Agile Zen” or principles that make Agile work. Rather than reevaluating existing processes to achieve greater agility, federal project management organizations typically choose to contort Agile processes so they fit within existing management, acquisitions, and contracting culture. This leads to a tailoring of Agile practices that is misinformed by traditional federal management biases. As a result, federal departments and agencies seldom achieve the reputed benefits of Agile software development.
This bias towards Waterfall-based management of software/system development efforts is systemic and rooted in the laws, policies and regulations (LRPs) that govern federal acquisitions and contracting. These precepts will not change overnight. However, waiting until they change is neither desirable nor necessary. Enough flexibility exists in the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) now to reverse this bias and achieve real agility in how software-based capabilities are developed, fielded, and maintained. New acquisition and contracting practices are in place and in use today that align, rather than conflict, with Agile principles and practices. Finally, Agile thinking has evolved beyond its application at the software development team level to scaling it across both the IT and organizational enterprise.