False. It was adopted at an organization where I worked because of what it promised management, which was greater productivity. It died because management wan

False. It was adopted at an organization where I worked because of what it promised management, which was greater productivity. It died because management wanted greater observability (and, I presume, control). There was an impedance mismatch (so to speak) between the agile team and upper management - management wasn't getting their GANTT and PERT charts, and couldn't figure out how to manage the agile team. "Trust us, bro, we're delivering" didn't cut it, though the agile team had a track record of delivering. > Nobody making the decisions really gives a shit about what's on the manifesto. That's probably true. But if agile is any good, shouldn't it be good for the organization, not just the programmers? Shouldn't it deliver actual value faster than other approaches? (And in fact, we did. But management just had to have their charts to be sure we were going to...)