A bit of context: The following inquiry asks about the "Agile Business Change" methodology I introduced in Keep the Joint Running, ("Fruitful business change," 5/26/2008). It's an attempt to extend Agile-style software development methodologies to encompass business change in its entirety. It takes the 3-year vision/1-year strategy/3-month goals/4-week plan formula designed for individual executives and managers A bit of context: The following inquiry asks about the “Agile Business Change” methodology I introduced in Keep the Joint Running, (“Fruitful business change,” 5/26/2008). It’s an attempt to extend Agile-style software development methodologies to encompass business change in its entirety. It takes the 3-year vision/1-year strategy/3-month goals/4-week plan formula designed for individual executives and managers and extends it to the whole corporation, in order to “chunk” strategic change into manageable bites. – BobDear Bob …Why wouldn’t upper management take a look at the 3 month plans and ensure that there is high-level coordination? Wouldn’t these things be a good source of discussion for the staff meeting where these middle-managers get together? It seems to me that asking the IT department to sort this out is kind of backwards–like asking the children to figure out where to sleep instead of the parents assigning bedrooms.– Thinking it throughDear Thinking … Once upper management takes on this role, the business loses agility. It’s the classic trade-off between control and velocity.When the ripple effects of proposed changes are “within hierarchy” the coordination you recommend works fine. It’s when the ripple effects are cross-functional that you need everyone’s brains firing on all cylinders.The IT department’s role is due to its position, and is entirely appropriate. IT is one of the few places in the company where all changes come together. Since IT has the opportunity to spot inconsistencies, I’d say it has an obligation to be alert to them. – Bob Technology Industry