Development Methods in the real world.

[Dave Smith]

Steve wrote:
> What is the reason for all of these other methodologies?

I think all of them exist so management can have a more tangible 
guideline for development, but I don't think they are necessary. I have 
worked on dozens of projects from conception to completion and the only 
time I employed an XP methodology (Scrum in my case) was because 
management insisted on it (we had some lazy engineers on the team who 
needed micro-management, at least according to managers). In all the 
other cases, just having smart, motivated people work on the project has 
been sufficient, and that includes project leadership. But since it's 
apparently very hard for management to find smart people and to motivate 
them (and to be smart and motivated themselves), they fall back on some 
laundry-list methodology to make their jobs easier. My current company 
excels in this area. Management doesn't even seem to know about XP 
methodologies, because what they do just works. We have a good working 
relationship with our customers, and we have gotten pretty good at 
managing projects.

I like Joel Spolsky's take on the topic. He contends that you have to be 
smart, and that no methodology can replace that. Here's the article:

    http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000356.html

--Dave