Agile Is Not a Transformation. It’s a Commitment

Svetozar Eliseev

13 Nov 2024 — 1 min read

In a recent Ticker News feature on Agile Project Management, the usual success story unfolds: faster delivery, better communication, and improved alignment between IT and business. But as Gehtsoft CEO Ivan Gekht often says:

“Transformation is easy to declare—and easy to fake. Commitment is harder.”

At Gehtsoft, we’ve seen Agile succeed not when companies roll out new tools—but when they redesign how they think, decide, and take responsibility. That’s why our delivery model always centers on:

Stable engineering teams that own outcomes, not just sprints
Architecture-first thinking, even in Agile cycles
Scientific validation, not just velocity reports

Real agility isn’t visualized in a Kanban board—it shows up in what you ship, how fast you course-correct, and whether your product survives the first real constraint.

Read the full article: Transforming Business with Agile Project Management – Ticker News

Risk Management under Real Velocity: Push Detection Downstream, Limit Blast Radius

I was recently quoted in a TechBullion article on balancing speed and security in business risk management. The core idea was simple: increasing business velocity does not remove the need for risk management. It changes its economics. This is not a technical nuance. It is a decision problem. At higher

AI and the missing first step in learning

What could be the long-term impact of AI on career progression in knowledge work? I saw a post recently asking whether AI will replace junior Scrum Masters. That question itself is not new. But it triggered a realization I had not connected this way before. And it is not very

Code Is No Longer the Bottleneck. Now What?

An advantage that everyone has is not an advantage. Agentic tools handle boilerplate, tests, and even non-trivial features. If your bottleneck was implementation speed, it's gone. Yet Amdahl's Law still applies: the speedup you get from accelerating one part is limited by the parts that don&

AI does not fail because of models. It fails because of governance.

A 2025 BCG analysis cited by Business Insider suggests that only around 5% of companies extract meaningful value from AI investments. The rest experiment, present, and absorb cost. The instinctive explanation is technical immaturity. Models are new. Tooling evolves quickly. Talent is scarce. That explanation is convenient. The DORA 2025

Read more

Risk Management under Real Velocity: Push Detection Downstream, Limit Blast Radius

AI and the missing first step in learning

Code Is No Longer the Bottleneck. Now What?

AI does not fail because of models. It fails because of governance.

Cookie Settings