Scrum
The company I work for decided 5 years ago to switch to a more Agile / Scrum development method. A consultant promised the CEO that with this method we would be more effective and he used some bullshit use case found on internet.
Since then two major projects have failed due to the following reasons:
- sprints of 3 weeks are too short to achieve substantial development
- focus on short term - easy achievable goals. A pitfall fueled by easy to check off backlog items and tasks
- work on core and foundation has not much attention. Hard to show and demonstrate to your stakeholders this kind of work.
- make small pieces and of software and patch / refactor later is not a way to build stable buildings let alone software
- lot of administrative overhead with daily standup's; sprint review; grooming sessions; retrospective etc.
- Agile promised to offer better dealing with shifting requirements but this is a false promise.
Not sure why the world has gone mad but our company was doing a lot better beforehand. A false fallacy is often used to compare this method with the waterfall method with rigid requirements once written down. However no company works that way.
