I think the author has made the mistake of "what works best for me is what works best for everyone". It's easy to make. Likely, they had many bad teams that use

I think the author has made the mistake of "what works best for me is what works best for everyone". It's easy to make. Likely, they had many bad teams that used "agile" as an excuse for poor management systems, leading to burnout. Then, they found a system that worked really well for them in their project and said "aha! everyone who isn't doing it this way must be experiencing what I experienced before I did this!". Look, the point of Agile is that the team builds the process that works best for them within the parameters of the work that needs doing. If you're burning out because of your process not working, change the process. For most teams I've been on, a month-long sprint is too much. Once my team switched from 2-weeks to 3-weeks, and in that situation it was pretty good. But on other teams, requirements and priorities shifted frequently, and sometimes 2 weeks felt too long. This same "well that might work" pattern applies to most of this document's recommendations, in my view. But kudos to the author for finding a system that works for them in their current situation.