| > You say “retain managers” — plural. You’re putting words in their mouth. The only use of "managers" was with respect to the use of Scrum itself, which is only tangentially related to what came before it. It logically cannot put words into anyone's mouth as it is not directly related to any mouths that may be near. It is only directly related to the comment that it is contained within by the additional context it setup. > The article is basically suggesting POs shouldn’t control the backlog because engineers know better (essentially). Yes, that is what Agile also says. Of course, it also says that you need the right people. We need to know more about the specific engineers to know if it is a valid take. Statistically it won't be, but perhaps it is under his unique circumstances? It is invalid to conflate his situation with someone else's. > Sounds like they’ve had a bad experience and want to vent about it. Fine, but it’s an immature take imho. I know Agile isn't cool anymore, but there was a time where the industry as a whole actually tried to embrace it. It wasn't considered immature then. Perhaps it is immature now only because it is no longer in fashion? > I am an engineer myself and I think it’s insulting If you are insulted by words on a screen, you might need to think about it harder. That is not logically sound. |
I don't think agile itself made all the promises that large projects wanted. However it made a few and then consultants seeing money jumped in and made more promises. Often agile couldn't deliver on the promises because there is good reason large projects can't allow engineers control over some of the things agile demanded engineers control.
Everyone wants to throw out Agile. However I don't see anything to replace it.