Architecture vs Agile

There are various technology "holy wars" that have been fought throughout the years.
PC vs Apple
Thin client vs Desktop computing
etc.

Some have been resolved and some still continue to this day.

And now, as more digital / business transformation projects are adopting an agile approach to software configuration and development... another battle, albeit one that has been raging for some while, is growing in its intensity and prominence.... That of the agile approach vs the need to define architecture for a solution in advance.

As both a supporter of agile to create products & get feedback quickly, and an architect of digital products and services (both large and small) I understand both sides of this war.

Agile:
Wants to develop minimum viable products as quickly as possible, then get this in front of users and rapidly iterate towards completion. The focus is on "good enough" not excellence and likes the flexibility to change & improve features.

Architecture:
Designs those things that do not move... and the resemblance to buildings IS intentional. Architecture is usually fixed for the long-term and gives the foundations for other more nimble practices around it. Technical Architecture (what I define as the combination of the Enterprise Architecture and Solution Architecture disciplines) should provide general directions (e.g. public cloud/hybrid/private, buy vs build, etc.) and standards. Plus architecture should also make  higher-level decisions on technology and principles which would be hard to change subsequently (e.g.coding language, integration methods, etc.).

Where things get messy is in the lower-level design of applications and their solutions. Here is where the agile versus architecture battle is waged. Where teams need to be empowered sufficiently to create products that meet the user stories... but also need enough guard-rails and check-points to operate within governance.

Minimum Viable Experimentation

Those who work in the digital and agile world should be pretty familiar by now with the implementation of a Minimum Viable Product (MVP). This is the creation of a working product that doesn’t have to meet all requirements, but allows further testing, feedback & iterative improvements. It is an approach pretty well understood and used across the industry and one that should lead to better products sooner.

So perhaps we need to use this approach, not just in the creation of the initial product, but in the way we release further functionality & features to our products? This would mean focusing less on the usefulness what each new piece of functionality provides (in economic terms the 'utility'), but basing each successive development on what it tells us about the product's overall ability to meet the wider strategic objective?

In other words, rather than add new stuff that simply compliments the overall richness of the experience... shouldn't each new tangible delivery be based upon a hypothesis? And in-turn, shouldn't this hypothesis be derived from insight that is focused on improving the user's needs or outcomes?

For example... if your project aim (which I assume directly linked to your strategic objective) is "to have a better online sign-up process for a new credit card", then each successive sprint or release from the initial product launch should be delivered to address this aim. However you shouldn't just assume that this is the case. 

Firstly make sure that each time you plan your deliverables you are actually answering a question, such as:

"How can we stop [a specific type of customer] exiting the online form before the end of the process?"

Secondly develop a hypothesis that can be tested in a small experiment. Such as:

"We believe that by adding [1: a specific feature] at [2: a specific point] we will create [3: an expected behaviour] by the user and therefore they will reach [4: an outcome] that will improve [5: a goal]."

Where in our new credit card sign-up example this could be:

1	A specific feature	A reassuring statement about financial approval
2	A specific point	The 4th of 5 pages in the process, where the most users drop out
3	An expected behaviour	The user is reassured that they could be approved easily
4	An outcome	The user moves to the 5th (and final) page of the process
5	A goal	Form conversion improves

It is worth stressing the point that these experiments don't have to be huge or complex, and in some cases making changes to a piece of content or image may be sufficient. They just have to be enough to prove or disprove your experiment's hypotheses…. a minimum viable experiment and nothing more.

What is Agile Marketing ?

I use the term Agile Marketing quite a lot these days and regard it as an approach that organisations need to adopt.

Here's what I mean by this:

1. Embrace test & learn

The days of "fire & forget" for a campaign are over. If you are launching a digital marketing initiative lasting longer than a week, then you really need to consider how you're going to improve it over time. For example... Sending an email out to more that a handful of people? Then test multiple subject lines first

Note: This approach also goes hand-in-hand with the philosophy that...

2. You need to understand that you're not going to get it all right first time

In much the same way as your developers create an MVT (minimum viable product) that releases working but evolving software to customers, learn that your marketing campaigns are never going to be the best they could be unless you change them based upon insight and understanding. And rapidly....

3. Use data to gain insight and understanding

If you are not using your digital analytics tools to their full capability, they you are doing you and your organisation a disservice. Use clack tracking, surveys and even the raw data to understand & refine what your users want (and are not getting). Then also Learn who are your true social media influencers and online friends. The finally...

4. Become your digital agency's best friend and worst enemy

Unless you have in-sourced absolutely everything to do with your digital marketing & development (from programmatic display media through to website testing) then you're going to be using an agency. Therefore get to know their strengths and their weakness... and play to them to get the most of out them... ideally for the best value possible.