The halo effect point seems especially important. If you ask a bunch of people who are personally invested in DevOps, who are leading teams whose job it is to m

The halo effect point seems especially important. If you ask a bunch of people who are personally invested in DevOps, who are leading teams whose job it is to make have a successful DevOps org/transformation, then you're going to tend to get results back from surveys that show the method is working even if it's an unconscious bias on the part of the respondents. And they'll all be biased in the same direction towards each other, no coordination required. Apart from that, the part about "inferential prediction" seems particularly damning. Similar to the author I think that a lot of DevOps is valuable, but they raise some good points that some of the reasoning presented in the book is quite circular and prone to bias. We can't really say that DevOps is scientifically proven.