One of the reasons I think we don't have a clear understanding of methodology effectiveness is that there's too many other variables. For example you could tak

One of the reasons I think we don't have a clear understanding of methodology effectiveness is that there's too many other variables. For example you could take the same team, completing the same project and have them work under different methodologies in order to see which one was the fastest, best quality, etc. but even that isn't possible since the team would be better the second time around. Also what works for one team may not work for another due to personalities, work culture, etc. different projects may be better suited to a different approach. We tend to want to find the one true methodology, but I don't think it exists. I tend to think that just using any methodology at all will tend to give better results because it means the team is at least attempting to manage the process. It usually means that at least somebody on the team cares about keeping some kind of organization. Even if it's a loose version of a methodology. Having no methodology at all can work too, but tends to rely on heroics and can be more stressful for everyone - especially the other people in the company who need to plan their work around the development schedule.