Can PRINCE2 be agile?
If the exam went ok I should shortly be a ‘PRINCE2 registered practitioner’. The problem is that at first sight there is a total mismatch between the top-down approach of Prince2 and the Agile approaches Ruby is at home with.
“The core value of an egalitarian meritocracy runs deep in the agile movement”, according to one of the founders of the Agile Movement1. PRINCE2, on the other hand, is all about control. Not only that, but even a quick glance at PRINCE2 diagrams shows its origins in the heyday of Waterfall methods.
If the two approaches really are incompatible then Ruby and Rails (not to mention almost all software development that has emerged from the free software movement) would be increasingly ruled out of all government projects. Not only is the OGC fully behind PRINCE2, but there is definitely a viral aspect to PRINCE2 once it has a foothold in an organisation.
Searching around for attempts to reconcile the two doesn’t return much. DSDM seems to be the only formal method around, and that is heavily proprietary - it seems that to read about it I have to sign away the possibility of commenting on it, so I won’t.
The alternative is to start from first principles. PRINCE2 is always very clear that it can be combined with other methods:
“PRINCE2 does not cover all aspects of project management. Certain aspects of project management (such as leadership and people management skills, detailed coverage of project management tools and techniques) are well covered by other existing and proven methods and are therefore excluded from PRINCE2.”
So can PRINCE2 and a specific Agile method just be merged? Julian Harris has produced a spreadsheet of one set of potential mappings between each of the PRINCE2 stages and its closest equivalent in Scrum. Authorising a Work Package, for example, is mapped to the start of a new Sprint.
In the process of mapping, it’s noticeable that the fine detail of the PRINCE2 stages is being forced into a few much coarser-grained Scrum categories. The role of the Executive almost vanishes; the separation between Customer and User goes; and the Ad-Hoc Direction stage is removed. In other words, the compromise between top-down control and ‘egalitarian meritocracy’ is achieved by simply removing the controls. This is not likely to be acceptable to organisations already using PRINCE2.
So could we instead slot an agile approach into an overall Prince2 framework? The obvious thing to do would be to use agility within the Managing Project Delivery substages. PRINCE2 is fairly quiet about the MP stage - it doesn’t matter too much how it works, as long as it gets done and any problems are reported on quickly. Following Julian’s approach, the Scrum Master would now become the Team Leader rather than the Project Manager. Some aspects fit fine: for example, the use of Test Driven Design could be specified in the Work Package. The problem now is the reverse of Julian’s solution: a self-contained agile method within a single PRINCE2 stage has surrendered all the bottom-up initiative that allows it to work.
Issue Control seems to be the main problem from the PRINCE2 side. The intention is that tolerances (cost, timing, scope, quality etc) are set from above - and that anything which looks likely to exceed the tolerances needs reporting upwards for decisions as soon as it is noticed. Applied so strictly that it removes all initiative this would stifle any team, but it seems a particular problem for an agile team.
On the Agile side, one problem is access to users. PRINCE2 moves the user connection with the product up to the Senior User on the Project Board; agile methods need continuous interaction with the user during development.
Neither problem looks insurmountable if there is a will to make it work. Tolerances can be set loosely. Some decision making ability can be delegated downwards. Users can be involved in multiple levels of the project. None of this needs to mean giving up on the PRINCE2 principle of fixing the approach before work starts.
But in practice are the underlying philosophies just too different? I know that at one time Alasdair Mangham of Camden Council was musing a PRINCE2 approach to managing open source development based on experience with APLAWs - did it ever happen? Is anyone in the UK actually trying to merge these approaches? I’d love to know…
- Jim Highsmith, Agile Project Management p.9 [↩]
Darjeelink - Alexis Perrier » Blog Archive » Combiner Agile et PRINCE2 on 04 Feb 2008 at 8:12 pm #
[...] Graham Seaman also wonders Can PRINCE2 be agile? [...]
DelphinusD on 11 Nov 2008 at 2:03 pm #
Prince2 was created by the government, for the government. It is a common sense approach which has been made into a large, document-heavy and committee-heavy methodology. It is less about control and more about the illusion of control and competence - “I have a document which says how we control things!” and having traceability “I have another document which shows we did this step!”. This tracability serves mainly to remove individual accountability - by helping individuals hide behind decisions made by board and committee.
Who are these people who don’t want accountability? The ignorant ones? The incompetent ones? The competent ones? Yes - not surprisingly, Prince2 attracts many different types of people: (a) the ignorant - follow it to the letter because they think this alone will assure success; (b) the incompetent - ensuring self-preservation; (c) the rest of us - because that’s what more senior people believe will deliver the project using staff they have in (a) and (b) - and if it doesn’t work they are preserved also.
Back to Agile. As stated before, the elements of Prince2 are common sense - so incorporating Agile into it should be possible - if you can convince your governance bodies to accept not only different levels of tolerances but different types of items to track. In the same way testing is tracked by % across many different areas to check on progress until quality is ‘good enough’, so Agile development could be also. Worth some more thought I think.
Hammad Khan on 25 Aug 2009 at 10:41 am #
DelphinusD - having working within large projects that have been ran on both Prince2 and Agile, as well as within the public and private sector, I couldn’t agree more with what you have said.
Prince2 has definately become a great way for those in the public sector to justify their jobs due to their place within an overly complicated framework that places too much emphasis on document creation, without any tangible way to measure effectiveness on an ongoing basis or value added by individuals. Its thanks to systems like this that so much within government is waste, yet there is very little that can be done to pinpoint the problem.
Ian on 02 Dec 2009 at 9:21 am #
I am fascinating by how PRINCE2 has now started to become entrenched in the private sector. The methodology seems to create a mountain of unnecessary paperwork and as another commenter says provides cover for the incompetent and inefficient to hide behind.