Agile is executed many different ways across projects and programs. But it is necessary to track and report progress against the enterprise goals and mission. Within government, using a metric like ROI is not as useful for comparing programs as the more basic issue is meeting mission needs for services delivered rather than making a profit.
With passage of FITARA, issuance of the digital services playbook and TechFAR, and departments updating their System Engineering Lifecycle and issuing agile guidance and policy, there is more official agile push than ever before. Additionally, OMB300’s TechStats, and other mandatory reporting remain a constant within the federal government. However, programs will execute agile adoption in unique ways because of short feedback loops and inspect and adapt cycles within the execution of any program. The best department and government level guidance allows for this to provide a forum for experimentation and improvement within delivery of value. Even if one agency or department tries to standardize, the overall government is unlikely to settle on one way of actually delivering software. Of course, many agencies are not focused on one way of executing and are focused instead of delivery.
With the fifty (or more) shades of agile across the federal government, how can congress, or even just heads of departments, provide sufficient oversight and ensure that the mission needs are met?
This presentation explores the different ways that government agencies are executing agile and how those programs can still provide the information and insight to provide executives the ability to manage the large scale direction of the government entities.

You must be a Member to view this post and you are currently not logged in.

You can either log in below or sign up here.