This is a weird article. There's a lot of rhetoric, and I especially take offense to the framing: > creating your own version of Scrum is a rite of passage for

This is a weird article. There's a lot of rhetoric, and I especially take offense to the framing: > creating your own version of Scrum is a rite of passage for engineering managers [...] usually result[ing] in catastrophic failure The whole point of a framework is to adapt it to the specific context in which it is applied. This reads like a scrum apologetic, proclaiming that if your scrum is not working, you're not doing True Scrum. Then the second part of the article is "pointless" practices of Scrum. Which is it--should we create our own version of Scrum, or should we not? There's no hard data or evidence. Not even anecdotes. Overall, it looks like someone applied a light layer of css over ["part I like about scrum", "parts I don't like about scrum"]