“you have to both act and study if you’re going to do either one effectively”

I would like to add “collaborate”. So, along with “act”, and “study”, if the company also wrote (publicly… say on their blog) about their experiences and experiments, then they may be able to share and learn by engaging the larger community.

Just my 2 cents.

That being said, I’m guilty of it myself. It’s a constant battle to find the line.

Yup, I see what you mean. Unfortunately, my only exposure to Dreyfus is a single class (which was actually about BDD, Dreyfus was a tangent) and that one chapter in Andy’s book. So, I’m not an expert on Dreyfus. :-)

If I had to guess I would say that what is meant is that a novice learns best from recipes, but doesn’t always want to do what is best for them. :-)

For me, the benefit of learning about both the Shu-Ha-Ri and Dreyfus models has been the realization that there are these ways of thinking about how people learn which can help one better understand how to be an educator and also how to understand results.

I have a long way to go in understanding both, but have learned enough to know that they are worth learning about! :-)

Nice to “meet” you by the way. Cheers,

Damon

One thing, though, is that the problem I’m talking about is the part where in the model it says “Novice wants recipes…” but I keep running into Novices who seem to think they’re experts. What they want to do is skip the recipes and go right to the incorrect interpretation and application of the complex skills they’re trying to avoid bothering to learn. If you see what I mean. :-(

alan

By the way, if you like the ShuHaRi concept, you’ll probably also like the Dreyfus model of skills acquisition. See this post from Dan North called “Learning to Lean” http://dannorth.net/2008/06/learning-to-lean for more info.

Andy Hunt’s book “Refactor Your Wetware” has a whole chapter on Dreyfus. By the way, this is a must-read book!!

Anyway, I think some of the DIY attitude with Agile comes from a belief that it is easier to go Agile than it really is. I’ve heard more “we need to be more Agile” lately, said as though “Agile” was just a synonym for “nimble,” as though the Agile movement was just a wake-up call. As though it was a call for a change of attitude only, to be more flexible and less rigid, to be more responsive. No new understanding or practices required, just do the things we already know how to do, but now do them in a more “agile” way.

But I think part of it also comes from a practical side. Not everybody that wants to go Agile has or can get the budget for coaches. I personally think Agile coaches and Agile training are the most effective and also the least expensive (in ROI terms) way to go Agile, but if there’s no budget, there’s no budget.

Realizing that DIY Agile is here to stay, I’ve changed my blog to be “Do it Yourself Agile.” The idea is to always advocate coaching and training, but to provide help for folks that don’t have a choice.