I disagree. First of all, I am sure there are scientific ways to analyze things like this, scientists deal with phenomena like this all the time. But the main

I disagree. First of all, I am sure there are scientific ways to analyze things like this, scientists deal with phenomena like this all the time. But the main problem is - if people don't actually know if the standup meeting helps, they shouldn't recommend it as a part of SCRUM (or other methodology). I know that in Agile, it's popular to say "if you think it doesn't work, change it". It's a first step towards scientific approach, but also very naive step - it can easily cause you to create rituals with no effects, just based on anecdotal coincidences. It is kind of disconcerting. On one hand, I applaud the excitement of Agile fans for critical thinking and scientific method, but at least they could study it a little - to find out that there is a little more to it than just "if it doesn't work change it". And that they shouldn't propose things that are not properly justified.