On CrystalClearMethodology, AlistairCockburn said:

''As a maximalist, I'm asking, what's the maximum effect we can get from the limited amount of energy and discipline people have? The result looks something like Crystal.''

To me, a maximalist sounds like a person who is looking for the most efficient approach given a particular constraint.

What if we changed the constraint?  Same amount of limited energy but a higher level of discipline to allow higher efficiency?

I would expect at a certain scale the result would look something like ExtremeProgramming.

But what compensates for the higher level of discipline?  I suspect it to be the FortyHourWeek principle.  But I'm not sure that's all there is to it... ''I am an artist :-),  I don't need no stinking compensation.  If I attempt a method it is for my own reasons,  since it is uncompensated and unrecognized,  it will cease as soon as I find something better,  and something better will come along,  why does something need to be organized,  there's so many methodologies springing up everywhere that I can take bits and pieces from each and extract some value and deliver on an ad hoc basis for the rest of my life... the spring will never dry up,  why try to fixate on anything for too long?  I'm never going to be a certified anything except a certified lateral thinker between methodologies :-).  My fundamental practice is RelentlessHarvesting -- there's nothing else to remember so not much ongoing discipline is required,  except when coffee runs out I would have to pull my leg hairs to stay awake.  Projects will often fail in their stated objectives,  but I'll be damned if nothing came out of it.''

I'm wondering also whether this change in constraint can just be plopped into the MethodologySpace and allow at least a structured approach to get TheMostEfficientMethodologyThatCouldPossiblyWork given different project situations. 
--JasonYip

Jason, I just realized that I haven't answered this because I don't know how. So, it's not that I'm not interested and therefore ignoring the question, but rather that there are so many variables in selecting / constructing a methodology that I don't see the differential equation. The reason I add this note now is because I realized that it is sometimes informative to hear that someone can't answer a question. cheers --AlistairCockburn

----

''what compensates for the higher level of discipline?''

PairProgramming makes a higher level of discipline easier to attain.  ''How is that?''  Because, with someone watching you, you are less likely to cut corners -- and, it's part of the second person's job to remind you to be disciplined. ''So it's just like Ye Old Panopticon.  Only updated for AgileTM Managers of the 21st century.  PP sounds like a miserable experience.  Tell me, what is this practice productive of?  Seriously PairProgramming is really instant enforced YAGNI and DTSTTCPW,  so it's really the opposite of cutting corners,  since solo programmers more often tend to get carried away :-)''  Paired programming is also instant enforcement of test first, small changes, merciless refactoring, and continual code review.  All elements of discipline.  Also, violations of YAGNI and DTSTTCPW are essentially attempts to cut "future" corners now.  See PairProgrammingBenefits for more.  


And a lot of the disciplines that require a higher level of discipline in the short run (always write unit tests, RefactorMercilessly) will, in the long run, lower the discipline needed.

OTOH, I wonder if this could be a danger - a long run ExtremeProject could get complacent.  ''I think only if they stopped measuring their velocity.''
----

Discipline(thought process) is only a means to an end,  never an end in itself.    
Discipline fails.