I just passed PSM and PSPO, and someone send me this article and "is that still been used?" remark.

Congrats on passing the exams! 

Anyway, this guy must be all sorts of fun at parties. Scrum is not a silver bullet. It is not THE solution to everything and anything. He touches some nice points, like "you don't need Scrum to be agile" etc. Scrum is a mean to an end, it's not the end in itself. Still, he puts it very black and white. But, that old, rigid organizations swallow the rest is a bullshit statement. Absolute disruption like Instagram, Facebook, the Ocean Cleanup, has nothing to do with old rigidity and still make a huge impact.

My personal take on this is that there a lot of people/organizations/frameworks/whathaveyou ride the hype of agile and Scrum in particular. Ultimately, I think that a lot under the umbrella of agile will perish, Scrum will become a sort of a baseline where organizations start to adapt their own ways in a way Spotify did, and in that sense create something that works best for them specifically. Local, framework emergion if you will.

It seems like the author is coming from the 'scrum is a silver bullet' approach which many practitioners know just isn't the case. Scrum isn't sufficient on it's on because it requires people and process to change and improve based on empirical evidence. 

If I were to apply the Scrum Framework to my everyday life it would likely shed light on bad habits that don't align with my goals...perhaps I eat too many sweets, don't floss enough, and don't get enough sleep. It's up to me to change my process and re-evaluate if improving those habits are important to me. When I go to the dentist and they tell me once again to floss more do I blame Scrum? Or the Dentist? 

Although Scrum is one of the most widely used frameworks now Scrum may also be one of the most misunderstand frameworks... 

What I got out of the article is the many companies don't fully understand, embrace and implement Agile and Scrum properly and from this he somehow draws a conclusion that Agile and Scrum are worthless. I agree that most companies don't understand Agile and the fact that it's a culture change and end up with a failed Agile transformation. The result of which is a mindset that Agile sucks or doesn't work. Only one of the last three companies I've worked for did leadership understand and embrace Agile. That company has been very successful in their transformation. The other two have struggled primarily due to leadership and their inability to let go of their waterfall ways Something I talk about in recent article I wrote called Don't Get Stuck in the Wagile Zone. As the authors of Scrum said in the Scrum Guide, Scrum is easy to understand and hard to master. You'll never be successful with any change if you don't understand it and fully embrace it. 

I read the article. He doesn't understand Scrum. The Scrum that he describes is what most people think Scrum is.  He describes a process with specific rules where a Scrum Master manages the project and the organizations are not willing to change.  That is the Scrum that too many people know. So in that case, I completely agree with him that his version of Scrum sucks. 

However, the version of Scrum that is described in the Scrum Guide and that all of us know does not suck.  It is a framework to support the adoption of agile practices. It in fact can be very useful and provide considerable value to those that are willing to make the changes necessary.  He points out that Scrum itself is not always enough and that practices such as XP are used.  Abso-f-ing-lutely!  Scrum practitioners advocate the use of other agile practices.  Scrum Masters need to be agile coaches.  They need to have an arsenal of practices that can be used together to accomplish goals. 

His view is from a Product Technology Manager role.  A role at Google. And I know a few people with that same title that also work at Google.  Not all of them are as obtuse.  I have had similar conversations with all of my friends and they all can see benefits and uses for Scrum.  

I will admit that many companies will start with Scrum.  Many have failed. Many have had levels of success and adapted to something that works.  Many have had success and continue with Scrum.  It isn't an absolute fit.  It is a framework.  Just like a house has a frame.  That house may work perfect for one family.  That structural design may work for another family initially but as they grow they modify the framework to add on additional rooms.  Another family with the same structural design may modify by removing a wall and combining two rooms into one big room.  But in the end, they all started from the same framework and evolved.  Such is agile. 

Love the analogy of the house, Daniel!

I agree with you all.

It is good to have all this thoughts here.

Thank you.

Dejan