Scrum has always been a waste of time attempting to solve problems that it created in the first place. All the planning burden of Scrum invariably goes out the window the moment you go to build something and realise every assumption was incorrect.

Then there is task sizing "oh it's not a time estimate" they say, then they schedule n points per two weeks, with the work sized in "not a time estimate" points now literally converted into a time estimate on the team's behalf. In addition, it then gets phrased as a "commitment" by the team of what will be delivered.

Kanban is really the only honest form of agile, with no wasted upfront planning commitment. Take top card, move it to completion, repeat. Prioritisation moves the card order and it doesn't have to be the devs job, more a product person can decide that.

I think the core point of the author is that scrum/agile is a bit of a decision processing framework with some of the responsibility split, more than a workload framework.

The author doesn't discuss kanban which is less overhead, but then makes collaboration acrossultiple scrum teams a bit trickier actually.

It started off strong but the started to read like it was generated by an LLM :(

[dead]