I only take some issue in last two paragraphs. I'll only mention for Agile teams, not other kinds: In Agile team, the team is responsible. Management decides h

I only take some issue in last two paragraphs. I'll only mention for Agile teams, not other kinds: In Agile team, the team is responsible. Management decides how to reach accountability, though in practice the team together can pull through more. Agile team wants stakeholders in team, or close to team. Team plans work according to agreements with stakeholders, but can never ever be forced to do anything against their explicit agreement. Which is why there's no room for management on the team. Agile teams sets managenent in their rightful place, and may work well when workloads, accountability and additional complexity are balanced within reason. Ensuring this for org, is too big for each team (indians). So chiefs are still needed around. Vs projects: Agile teams isn't suited in all circumstances. There might be important stakeholders, costs, dates, hard known requirements, regulatory and coordination needs, that makes projects more suitable methodologies. Projects are temporary and manager-lead (PM on team), however. Having a manager or PM in team though, isn't an Agile team. You need servant leaders on team, and managers wield too much power and information imbalance.