Category: Agile

Scrum and agile certification is now very much in focus. The ‘certification story’ is unfolding to become a major subject of debate in 2010. The story has several facets, with action from the Scrum Alliance, Scrum.org and the community-at-large, including notable bloggers and the Agile Skills Project.

At issue is the basic value of certification.

Skills Mind Map Fragment. from the AGILE SKILLS PROJECT

The story has several facets. The first facet is the recent blog post from Ron Jeffries asserting that certification divides the agile community. In that post, entitled Scrum Alliance: Drop Certified ??, he asserts:

<quote>

It’s time for the Scrum Alliance to stop using the C word, “Certified”. It is holding us all back by dividing and diluting our impact on the world of work.

</quote>

The full detail from InfoQ on the Ron Jeffries blog post can be viewed here.

The second facet of the certification story is the Scrum Alliance. The Scrum Alliance has authorized new certifications. The new Scrum Alliance certifications include Certified Scrum Developer (CSD) and Certified Scrum Coach (CSC). The Scrum Alliance’s relatively new tagline, “Transforming the World or Work” symbolizes the very real changes taking place inside this credentialing organization.

These new credentials at the Scrum Alliance come on the heels of founder Ken Schwaber formally leaving the Scrum Alliance to create an all-new credentialing authority called Scrum.org. Ken Schwaber is a signatory of the Agile Manifesto and a noted authority on agile and Scrum.

Thus the third facet of the certification story is the development of Scrum.org. The mission of Scrum.org as listed on the Scrum.Org web site is as follows:

<quote>

Scrum.org’s purpose is to improve the profession of software development so that we love our work and our customers love working with us and trust our integrity. To do so:

1. We maintain the consistency and integrity of the Scrum process.

2. We work with select partners to develop courseware and knowledge on how to use Scrum in various domains or work, such as risk management.

3. We work with trainers to learn and use the Program Development Partner courseware to help others learn how to build products using Scrum.

4. We work with Scrum users to help them incrementally improve their ability to use Scrum, including the application of self-assessments.

</quote>

Scrum certification is a hot topic, and getting even hotter with the development of new credentials by both the Scrum Alliance and the all-new Scrum.Org led by Ken Schwaber. Of particular interest is the fact that both organizations offer a Certified Scrum Developer (CSD) credential. The detail on the Scrum Alliance CSD can be found here while the Scrum.org CSD info can be found here.

A fourth facet, and perhaps the most interesting, is the emergence of the AgileSkillsProject at AgileSkillsProject.org. The organization describes itself as follows:

<quote>

The Agile Skills Project is a non-commercial resource that will establish a common baseline of the skills an Agile developer needs to have, including a shared vocabulary and understanding of fundamental practices. The Project intends to:

* Establish an evolving picture of the skills needed on Agile teams
* Encourage life-long continuous learning
* Establish a network of trust to help members find like-minded folk, and to identify new mentors in the community

</quote>

The Agile Skills Project (ASP) has direct connections to Ron Jeffries and several others who are notable in the agile community; see the full picture here on Ron Jeffries’ blog. InfoQ is carefully following and reporting on this story; see related InfoQ articles on the Agile Skills Project here and here.

What does the Agile Skills Project think about certification? One person involved in leadership of ASP is D.Andre Dhondt. In a recent email to InfoQ, Andre writes:

<quote>

“Following the recent flurry of blogs/tweets/etc. onCertifications (Robert Martin, Ron Jeffries, Chet Hendrickson,Tobias Mayer, Cory Foy, George Dinwiddie, Mike Sutton), I think it could be newsworthy to write an article about how certification really is just a red herring, as Sutton
suggests. The Agile Skills Project (ASP) doesn’t have an axe to grind here–it’s got no money, and doesn’t make a profit forrating/ranking/qualifying classes/certs/etc.

“The real, underlying problem is how do we get people hooked on lifetimeskills improvement? I think the answer is apoint-accumulating model in which people can show what they’redoing, be it paid courses or self-trained study. Dan Pink says motivation comes from autonomy-mastery-purpose. We givepeople autonomy in choosing whether they go for certs or not,read books, or go to conferences–but count it all as something that demonstrates progress, their way to mastery.We give purpose to the whole thing by making it community-owned…”

</quote>

One item of note regarding the Agile Skills Project is the ability of users of the ASP web site to post a personal “skills inventory”. This amounts to a chronological summary of professional development activities over time. See the sample skills inventory of D.Andre Dhondt here.

The ASP project is seeking community feedback on everything they are doing. The project is now an element of an new and emerging certification landscape for agile practitioners.

Related InfoQ articles:

Is Scrum Certification Having Another Makeover?

http://www.infoq.com/news/2010/02/scrum-certification-makeover

Scrum Certification Test

http://www.infoq.com/news/2008/11/scrum-certification-test

About the Author

Dan Mezick is an Agile coach and trainer focused on Scrum. He’s a 3-time presenter at Agile2007, 2008 and 2009 and an invited speaker to the Scrum Gathering (Orlando) in 2010. Dan’s company provides Scrum training and Agile coaching, counsel and guidance to executives, managers and teams. Learn more about Dan here.

Scrum certification is now very much in focus. The Scrum Alliance has authorized new certifications, and a new role called Creative Director.The new role is currently held by the outspoken Tobias Mayer. The new Scrum Alliance certifications include Certified Scrum Developer (CSD) and Certified Scrum Coach (CSC). The Scrum Alliance’s relatively new tagline, “Transforming the World or Work” symbolizes the very real changes taking place inside this credentialing organization.

These new credentials and new roles at the Scrum Alliance come on the heels of founder Ken Schwaber formally leaving the Scrum Alliance to create an all-new credentialing authority called Scrum.org. Ken Schwaber is a signatory of the Agile Manifesto and a noted authority on agile and Scrum.

The mission of Scrum.org as listed on the Scrum.Org web site is as follows:

<quote>

Scrum.org’s purpose is to improve the profession of software development so that we love our work and our customers love working with us and trust our integrity. To do so:

1. We maintain the consistency and integrity of the Scrum process.

2. We work with select partners to develop courseware and knowledge on how to use Scrum in various domains or work, such as risk management.

3. We work with trainers to learn and use the Program Development Partner courseware to help others learn how to build products using Scrum.

4. We work with Scrum users to help them incrementally improve their ability to use Scrum, including the application of self-assessments.

</quote>

Scrum certification is a hot topic, and getting even hotter with the development of new credentials by both the Scrum Alliance and the all-new Scrum.Org led by Ken Schwaber. (InfoQ articles on the emergent and ever-evolving nature of Scrum certification are listed below.)

Noted authorities in the agile/Scrum community are now engaging in active and often very heated discussions about the current and emerging dynamics of Scrum certifications.

Ron Jeffries, a signatory of the Agile Manifesto, is asserting with authority that Scrum certifications divide the community rather than unify it.

In a recent high-impact blog post entitled Scrum Alliance: Drop Certified ??, he asserts:

<quote>

It’s time for the Scrum Alliance to stop using the C word, “Certified”. It is holding us all back by dividing and diluting our impact on the world of work.

</quote>

Ron goes on to say:

<quote>

I’m writing this as a challenge to the Scrum Alliance (and scrum.org as well).

I’m challenging you people to drop the word “certified” from your offering. Figure out a revenue model based on delivering real value to people, not on extracting $50 for a PDF certificate, not on extracting many more dollars for a REP licence, not on extracting way more than that to be a “Certified” trainer. Base the value of the Scrum Alliance — and you, too, Ken — on making real people more successful and happier.

Yes, I know your hearts are good and the damage is low among the world at large. The damage from the C word is high, however, in the community that matters, the community of people who do this work.

It’s time to do the right thing. Stop using the C word.

</quote>

Mike Sutton, a UK-based Scrum coach and trainer, is the first comment, with a re-focus on community:

<quote>

Ron,

We should drop it if we think it is so tainted. But – I don’t. I think the agile community is railing against the level of rigour that is behind the C word, the ease of getting ‘Certified’ (effectively if you pay your money, you get certified) and the fact that there is no emphasis on continuous improvement – either by the need to recertify or the threat of decertification.

In many ways the Certification is not the issue. It masks the issue. We *all* want professionals (folk who are paid to do something) that are technically competent (in whatever they are paid to do), seek to continuously improve, know and constantly finding ways to collaborate, are passionate about doing great work and are mature enough to reflecton how they can achieve that. Some of that needs knowledge of process (agile) , but most of all it requires ongoing almost pastoral support of the individual by the community they are a part of.

Now that is the C word that we should be focusing on – Community.

</quote>

So far, so good. But it only takes a little while for a post like this to get the attention of Tobias Mayer. Tobias, a Scrum Alliance staffer, is compelled to weigh in on the debate. He responds with a delicate suggestion for Ron Jeffries..that he stop offering certified Scrum training:

<quote>

Ron, clearly you are opposed to Scrum certification, yet you say you ride the bandwagon to reap some of the benefits thereof. Perhaps that is what really needs to be addressed here. True change begins within oneself, not in other people, so “be the change you want to see in the world”.

You are an asset to the Scrum Trainer community, and I think almost without exception other trainers respect you, and value your contributions, but being a CST does NOT mean you must deliver CSM (and now CSD) training. The latter is a privilege of the former, but they are not bound. So practice what you preach in this post, and stop offering certificates with your training. Given your strong feelings on the matter it would seem the honorable thing to do.

And perhaps your example will encourage others to follow a similar path.

</quote>

A little later on, an outspoken blogger named John Sonmez weighs in. He makes the following comments and provides a link to heated and scathing rebuke of both Scrum.org and the Scrum Alliance:

<quote>

Ron,

Keep beating that drum. Right on. I agree whole-heartedly.
I just posted about the subject here: http://simpleprogrammer.com/2010/03/31/scrum-for-the-money/

I also agree about XP.

</quote>

This high-impact and authoritative blog post from Ron Jeffries entitled Scrum Alliance: Drop Certified ?? is now closed to comments. Many others posted comments to this hot blog post before comments closed, and the post certainly keeps the Scrum certification debate alive.

With the very real changes at Scrum Alliance and the advent of Ken Schwaber’s Scrum.org, the Scrum certification story is far from over … and in fact seems to be entering an entirely new phase of development.

Related InfoQ articles:

Is Scrum Certification Having Another Makeover?

http://www.infoq.com/news/2010/02/scrum-certification-makeover

Scrum Certification Test

http://www.infoq.com/news/2008/11/scrum-certification-test

About the Author

Dan Mezick is an Agile coach and trainer focused on Scrum. He’s a 3-time presenter at Agile2007, 2008 and 2009 and an invited speaker to the Scrum Gathering (Orlando) in 2010. Dan’s company provides Scrum training and Agile coaching, counsel and guidance to executives, managers and teams. Learn more about Dan here.

Agile Coaching has emerged as an essential role found in and around agile teams. New teams need basics, competent teams sometimes get lost, and great teams want to get better. Coaching has arrived.

For examples of evidence, consider the following:

1.Agile 2009 had a Coaching ‘Stage’ which is a conference track.

2. Classes exist now on coaching techniques and coaching agile teams.

2. Earlier, Rachel Davies published her book Agile Coaching (Pragmatic Press).

3. The Scrum Alliance has a relatively new, higher-level credential called Certified Agile Coach.

And finally, Addison-Wesley is now shipping the book Coaching Agile Teams by Lyssa Adkins.

InfoQ caught up with author Lyssa Adkins and asked a few question about agile coaching.

Here are the answers:

Your book Coaching Agile Teams is now complete, and in print. How does that make you feel?

I am thrilled beyond belief. I never set out to be an author, it just “happened” to me. It seemed like everyone I knew was saying things to me like, “That’s good! You gotta write that down” and “You should write a book.” So I did. And now I am so pleased to see the results of my agile coaching experience in book form and being used by so many coaches to “up their game” and help their agile teams excel.

What is the one thing you want the Agile community to really, really know? Be specific and detailed.

I am all about helping the next generation of excellent agile coaches to emerge. Why? I believe many organizations have used agile “in the small” so far, as an alternate project management methodology. In its fullest expression, agile is far more powerful than that. Sure, it works for pumping out the same work faster and yet there’s a sense that there’s more to get. And there is.

Excellent agile coaches know how to help their teams get more and move from the mechanical application of agile into a world where teams deepen their experience of agile practices and principles and then go further, to take up their deliberate and joyful pursuit of high performance. All of this made possible because they have an excellent agile coach as their guide. This is what I want the agile community to really, really know.

Why are you so passionate about agile coaching?

I have seen agile used to great effect and I have seen it used poorly and even as a weapon. When it’s used poorly or for ill, I see a wastefulness that I cannot abide. When people tell me they hate agile because it makes them work overtime and squelches their ability to innovate, I cringe and cry, “It doesn’t have to be that way! In fact, agile is set up to give you a work/life mix that works for you and is supposed to unleash your innovative mind.” I believe one of the key differences in a team with a negative experience like this and one with agile in full effectiveness and liveliness is the skill and ability of the agile coach. And, it just so happens that agile coaching is where my personal agile journey occurs, so the need and the personal story merge. That’s why I am laser focused on helping coaches coach agile teams.

The book Lyssa wrote, Coaching Agile Teams , ships to bookstores any day now. The book includes chapters on “Coach as Teacher” and “Coach as Facilitator”. These are particularly interesting chapters, as they are about techniques for accelerating team learning. The chapter “Navigating Conflict” is especially useful for coaches new to facilitating communication between people when substantial differences exist between them. Differences are the raw ingredients of group learning, and this chapter provides solid guidance on navigating these differences such that the team is the winner.

Coaching is part teacher, part mentor, part facilitator, part mediator and part problem solver. The role of agile coach is an interesting and demanding one. Being coached is now established as a valuable practice, and agile coaching is now a profession.

Stay tuned for the upcoming interview of Coaching Agile Teams author Lyssa Adkins, for more detail on the essential role of coaching on agile teams.

About the Author

Dan Mezick is an Agile coach and trainer focused on Scrum. He’s a 3-time presenter at Agile2007, 2008 and 2009 and an invited speaker to the Scrum Gathering (Orlando) in 2010. Dan’s company provides Scrum training and Agile coaching, counsel and guidance to executives, managers and teams. Learn more about Dan here.

The Agile community has an all-new set of certification credentials.

The new International Consortium for Agile (ICAgile) is led by three well known agile community members. The first is Alistair Cockburn is a signatory of the Agile Manifest. The second is David Hussman is a well-known agile coach and the recipient of the Agile2009 Gordon Pask Award. the third, Ahmed Sidky, is a book author and also a past organizer of the Agile Alliance 2009 conference.

These three have created an all-new credentialing body, the International Consortium for Agile, found at www.ICAgile.org.

The stated mission and vision of ICAgile is:

<quote>

…to educate and equip the global academic and industrial IT community with the mindset, practices and tools for creating high performance, lean and agile individuals, teams and organizations.

….ICAgile’s vision is to become the highest recognizable name worldwide for all those seeking to learn about Agile. We will keep working till ICAgile certificates are viewed as the most credible and reliable source of Agile education in the world.

</quote>

ICAgile has wide-scale ambitions, including the issuance of several certifications and at least one conference per year. According to the ICAgile web site, ICAgile plans to run conferences. Those seeking higher-end ICAgile credentials such as Instructor or Expert must attend a conference to comply with the “live testing” requirements of these ICAgile certifications.

Credentials that ICAgile intends to issue (with the help of certified trainers) includes:

1. ICAgile Professional

2. ICAgile Expert

3. ICAgile Fellow

4. ICAgile Instructor

The ICAgile program appears to generate considerable demand for the contemplated annual conference by requiring those seeking credentials to attend to get certified. For example, to gain the ICAgile Expert credential, its is manditory to develop products in teams, at an ICAgile conference, while being rated and graded by ICAgile Experts and Fellows. Those seeking certification as trainers must deliver sessions at the conference; delivery of these sessions is a requirement of trainer certification.

The IC Agile Instructor program states:

<quote>

To ensure that applicants can teach fundamentals of Agile there is no better test than to actually observe them teaching. During the ICAgile Conference all the applicants that passed their phone interview will undergo a face-to-face interview with a group of ICAgile Fellows and Experts. Also they will be given a slot at the conference to teach a short topic of their choice to a group of attendees. The feedback of both the attendees and the ICAgile Fellows and Experts will determine whether the candidate will become an Authorized Instructor or not.

</quote>

ICAgile’s Certification Roadmap

The basic credential is the ICAgile Professional certification. According the the ICAgile web site, for applicants the first step is a ‘fundamentals’ phase; attending a course of about 5 days to get the level-setting basics. The next step is a ‘Focus’ track and attendance in a Focus class. Upon completion of these 2 steps including an assessment, the student may be certified as a ICAgile Professional.

The next step is to reach the level of ICAgile Expert. This requires conference attendance. The web site states the following for reaching Expert status:

<quote>

The … final phase is the Certification Phase. This phase is completed through 2 steps. The first is a phone interview with ICAgile Experts or Fellows that are specialized in the track you just finished. If the student passes the phone interview then they are ready for the final step to become an ICAgile Expert – the Hands-on Immersion. The hands-on immersion involves students from each track getting together and creating a cross functional team. At the ICAgile conference, this cross-functional team will have access to a real client and then in 4 hours the team is expected to produce a working slice of the system. The team will be observed by a set of ICAgile fellows who will later discuss with each team member their points of strength and weakness.

</quote>

To reach the level of ICAgile Fellow, one must first become an ICAgile Expert to be considered. The entire ICAgile Roadmap is clearly described.

The entry point for all applicants is to attend certified training: to gain the basic ICAgile Professional credential, applicants must attend certified ICAgile classes. The ICAgile program includes a fair amount of latitude in how certified instructors create course material; however any custom course material developed by the instructor must deliver on the stated ICAgile learning objectives, and be approved by ICAgile itself.

What is interesting is the position on the Agile Alliance on this matter. According to the Agile Alliance, for certification to be effective it must be certifying actual experience:

<quote>

A skill is not as simple to acquire as knowledge: the learner has to perform the skill badly, recover from mistakes, do it a bit better, and keep repeating the whole process. Especially for the interrelated and interpersonal skills required of Agile software development, much of the learning has to take place on real projects. It is that learning that a certification should vouch for.

Vouching for someone else’s skill requires close observation or questioning by someone already possessing it. For anything other than uninterestingly simple skills, that’s a lot of work–which means it’s expensive. Therefore, the only skills worth formally vouching for are those that require substantial effort to learn.

</quote>

The ICAgile certification details found at www.ICAgile.org make for a very interesting read, and the program, while complex, is well thought-out. What happens next remains to be seen. Certification is now front-and-center and the Agile community as a whole can now choose to aquire certifications from many credentialing bodies, including (but not limited to) Scrum Alliance, Scrum.org and now, IC Agile. InfoQ is monitoring the certification scene closely and is planning more articles on the subject. A recent InfoQ story Reactions to the First Certified Scrum Developer Course has generated a high volume of blog posts, comments and controversy. There is clearly a strong interest in where certification is going in the Agile marketplace.

Stay tuned for more certification articles and subsquent news stories from InfoQ!

About the Author

Dan Mezick is an Agile coach and trainer focused on Scrum. He’s a 3-time presenter at Agile2007, 2008 and 2009 and an invited speaker to the Scrum Gathering (Orlando) in 2010. Dan’s company provides Scrum training and Agile coaching, counsel and guidance to executives, managers and teams. Learn more about Dan here.

Agility is a term that is gaining traction in some very unusual places. The military is suddenly taking Agility (big “A”) very seriously. The military defines Agility as “the ability to successfully respond to change”. The term “command and control” is used so commonly in the military that is abbreviated to “C2” in common usage. There is also a C2 Journal, a journal all about Command and Control. The C2 Journal has many articles on Agility recently.

Earlier this year, in March, a “Precis” was published by the Department of Defense Command and Control Research Center entitled The Agility Imperative. This document describes Agility as related to security and war. What is striking is the clarity of the language relative to software agility. Consider the following:

“Agile people conceive and approach the world and their assigned tasks differently from those who are less agile. In general, agile people have a propensity to seek improvements, are more willing to consider information that is at odds with preconceived notions, and are more willing to be different and take risks. These basic characteristics can be enhanced or suppressed by education, training, and culture. Unfortunately, many organizations, both large and small, suppress agility-enabling characteristics.”

The document from the C2 Research Center has much to say about people. For example:

“Often it is productive to focus on simply removing the obstacles to Agility. Just as an open and inquisitive mindset is an enabler of Agility, a closed and complacent mindset is an impediment.”

Those seeking clarity on the “command and control” vs. “Agile” debate are likely to enjoy examining the content at the Department of Defense Command and Control Research Center . For example, at this site, you can download a slide deck devoted to defining Agility in military terms. What is striking here is the near 100% overlap with descriptions of software development agility. Apparently, software development and war have much complexity in common: according to the Precis entitled “The Agile Emperative”, Agility applies anywhere there is a “Complex Endeavor” to deal with.

Does this sound familiar?

Information, Interactions, & Decisions in C2

Requisite Agility

Some definitions and concepts that apply to the military use of Agility might be useful in the software development world, especially as applied to large IT shops that are organized around the waterfall approach. One such concept is Requisite Agility. The paper The Agility Imperative defines “Requisite Agility” as a balanced level of Agility, a capital-allocation concept not generally discussed in the agile literature when addressing the mixing agile and traditional approaches.

“Agility is not an end unto itself. Therefore, Agility is not a capability that should be maximized. The capability to be agile (Agility Potential) and actual reactions to changes (Manifest Agility) both involve costs. These costs can be justified only by the nature of the challenge. The appropriate amount of Agility to seek, Requisite Agility, is a level that balances the costs of attaining it with the consequences of not having it, given the situation. Thus, Requisite Agility, not
unlimited Agility, should be the goal.”

Another interesting paper found inside the C2 Journal on the C2 Research Center site, Agility, Focus, and Convergence: The Future of Command and Control makes some points that can be applied directly to software development Agility:

“The word “control” is inappropriate…because it sends the wrong message. It implies that complex situations can be controlled…push the right levers; take this action or that; solve this problem. But this is a dangerous oversimplification. The best that one can do is to create a set of conditions that improves the probability that a desirable (rather than an undesirable) outcome will occur and to change the conditions when what is expected is not occurring. Control is in fact an emergent property, not an option to be selected.”

This C2 article goes on to say that ‘command and control’ is such a loaded term in the military that it limits perceptions and learning. Influential writers inside the military are working to change that language. The new suggested language uses Scrum values (Focus) and terminology from complexity science:

“Focus & Convergence is the term … to replace Command and Control…it captures the essential aspects of command
and control and can easily be understood by individuals without a prior knowledge of or experience with command and control. Furthermore, these words do not carry any preconceived notions of how to achieve these objectives. Focus as a replacement for command speaks directly to what command is meant to accomplish while being agnostic with respect to the existence of someone in charge or particular lines of authority. Similarly, convergence speaks directly to what control (the verb) is meant to achieve without asserting that control as a verb is possible or desirable. The combined term, Focus & Convergence, speaks to the existence of a set of dynamic interactions between the two functions.”

Another article on Agility in the C2 Journal, Agile Networking in Command and Control, focuses on how to incorporate “Agile C2” into modern military operations.

“Agile C2 … refers to the capability of a force to adjust to and manage changing operational conditions. Agility is seen as including robustness, resilience, responsiveness, flexibility, innovation, and adaptation in order to be effective…In order to achieve agility, it is required to have almost instant information sharing using robust networks, “self organizing” social structures for high responsiveness and fast feedback, and understanding of cause-and-effect relationships.”

In project management, we debate the relative merits of traditional Project Managers and Agile approaches. Here the military is doing something similiar, referring to “Agile Command and Control” while we refer to “Agile Project Managers”. It is interesting to note the parallels, especially in light of heated discussions on the PMI-Agile Yahoo Group about the validity of “Agile Project Manager” hybrids which incorporate aspects of waterfall and agile approaches.

The military is directly studying this dynamic of mixing traditional C2 with Agility. Consider this quote from The Agility Imperative:

“…understanding the consequences of the mixture of agile and non-agile people, in a variety of circumstances, is important. This is a topic being currently explored by DoD’s CCRP and its DoD and international partners.”

Those interested in articles and papers that address military Agility can search the C2 Research Center and quickly find resources such as papers, slide decks and web pages that cover Agility relative to traditional C2. The C2 Research Center is the place on the web where the best military minds are studying Agility relative to “Command and Control”. As such, it may be a great resource for those seeking to bridge Agility and traditional approaches.

Guys. Seriously.

The most amazing paper (perhaps ever) on Agility is referenced in this thread, have you seen it?

It lives at the Dept of Defense Command and Control Research Center.

http://www.dodccrp.org/files/Alberts_Agility_Imperative_Precis.pdf

Slide Deck defining Agility

http://www.google.com/custom?q=Agility&sa=Google+Search&domains=www.dodccrp.org&sitesearch=www.dodccrp.org

http://www.dodccrp.org/files/IC2J_v1n1_01_Alberts.pdf

The Future of Command and Control (C2 Journal)

The future of command and control is not Command and Control. In
fact, the term Command and Control has become a significant impediment
to progress.

“…our organizational structures and processes and, indeed, our approaches
to management, governance, and command and control, need to be re-examined
in the light of their ability to deal with an appropriate level of unpredictability.
Changes in our structures and approaches will be necessary to make them better
able to deal with the unfamiliar and unexpected.”

“Agility is the ability to successfully cope with change.”