>It requires the kind of buy in that, if you've got it, you probably don't need Scrum anyway. I agreed up until this. I worked for a company that was doing wa

>It requires the kind of buy in that, if you've got it, you probably don't need Scrum anyway. I agreed up until this. I worked for a company that was doing waterfall and miserable. Things were getting done, but it was a sloppy mess. Clearly we didn't have our stuff together. Our manager went and took scrum classes, and then we spent a few months trying it out. There was no day-one benefit, but over those months we managed to wrangle things around until everyone was on the same page. After that, things went a lot smoother. Management was actually planning things out (instead of just throwing projects around and hoping) and we had a clear view of what we would be working on at any given time. Shared resources, like the sysadmin and network admin and db admin, were able to be scheduled more effectively instead of project waiting on them, or them sitting around doing nothing. So no, I don't think that Scrum requires the kind of buy-in that indicates you don't need Scrum in the first place.