I work mostly with startups and I don't know any that could survive with a plan like this: > 3 weeks on/1 week off development cycle Unless you're lucky enoug

I work mostly with startups and I don't know any that could survive with a plan like this: > 3 weeks on/1 week off development cycle Unless you're lucky enough to have no competitors and a ton of runway and no major support issues ever, there's no way you can give your engineering team 12 weeks of vacation a year all at the same time. > Once a sprint has begun, Issues may not be added to the sprint, but they can be removed. This reduces context switching and that is a good thing. Yes, minimizing context switching is a great thing, but for 4-8 weeks you can't adapt to changing business conditions? A change that comes in on day 2 will have to wait 8 weeks to go live as it won't be put into a sprint for 4 more weeks and then launched another 4 after that. I'm a developer and totally understand the desire to have every requirement up front and peace and quiet to implement it. The goal should be to get as close to that as possible but still being open to business needs. Unfortunately I've seen first a dev team sink a multi-million dollar business through a lack of flexibility and turnaround time. I don't think you'll find many managers rushing to implement this, which is basically inflexible agile with a week of vacation every month. I think the experience of managing a dev team while trying to balance a budget would be invaluable for anyone thinking that this process makes sense.