I had a conversation of sorts with a blogger that stated essentially "EV is bunk," (this is false) "Value and Cost are not the same thing," (this is true).
I had another conversation where the statement "the WBS is not needed in agile when you're doing EV." (Where do we collect costs) Or "EV is not going to be needed on large DoD IT programs when we get agile installed and running." (Let me introduced you to the DCMA and DCAA).
This is like the conjectures about Complex Adaptive Systems that are completely devoid of mathematics. Or persona anecdotal experiences that get scaled to global levels?
So what am I missing?
When we come to technical processes, EV, CMMI, CAS, ITIL, and maybe even well defined instances of Scrum, there should be little confusion about the definition of the process, it's application, and most of all it's benefits. The unassailable beneficial outcome as we say in our proposal writing classes.
So why can't those with opinions start by reading the manual?
When it comes to EV, there are public domain sources for "the manual." ANSI-748B itself is not free, but the NDIA Earned Value Management Intent Guide is. At the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) site there are tons of resources. PMI has an EV Practice Guide (which is not free). There are books, articles. Google is our friend here.
When opinions start flying around about EV or CMMI there seems to be two camps. Those that practice the principles and find issues and discuss these issues, seeking improvements. Those who have not practiced the principles, may not even know the principles, and want to tell others that the principles and the practices are somehow wrong.
The classic is "The Value in Earned Value is not Business Value, and that makes EV useless for IT in the agile setting." Well Dah. The "value" in EV is NOT business value, and if you'd take even this minutest amount of time to read any EV book, you'd know that.
This would be all irrelevant is it were not for the esteem of some of these voices. Voices with major fimrs behind them. Voices with major credentials (PhD's) behind them.
So here's my test questions:
- Have you practiced the principles you are saying can't work?
- Have you asked those who have made it work in similar domains and contexts how they did it and if they have any advice for you?
- Have you sought out solutions from sources like articles, conferences, professional organizations? And at the same time sought connections with the people participating in those organizations?
No, then you're probably not having much success are you?
And by the way, those suggesting Earnend Value can be done outside of the 748B 32 criteria, you may have a point. But before getting too excited, ask how the "alternative approach addresses these 11 needed process areas, the colored ones?"
