[Ramone]

I'd be interested to hear about (1) that scrum failure in the 10's of millions of dollars, and (2) what you prefer instead of Agile.

(I'm a developer on a scrum team and really think it helps us, but I'm not dogmatic about it or anything... I'd like to hear about the other side. I'm surprised that a huge scrum failure is possible because the customer is generally shown everything at regular small intervals, so it's hard to imagine how a project could get so far off course.)

edit: grammar

[raganwald]

I don't know about that SCRUM failure, but the original XP project was a well-documented failure:

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Chrysler_Comp...

One way to explain things is to say that teams like Agile whether it's effective or not (for some definition of effective). Another way to explain this is to say that Agile can't make you succeed, but it's the fastest and cheapest way to fail.

When I'm selling snake-oil, I prefer the latter explanation.

[Ramone]

"Another way to explain this is to say that Agile can't make you succeed, but it's the fastest and cheapest way to fail."

Well said... That really cuts through to both the reality of Agile, and the key advantage.