There's more to Agile than Scrum. And there's more to Scrum than Scott's saying.
Diana Larsen and I sat down last year and wrote down all the different ways we saw people doing Agile, what worked, what didn't, and why so few teams were getting the promised benefits of what the agile movement promised, lo, those many years ago.
The nasty (but much shorter) version is here: People care more about slapping the "Agile" label on their door than they care about doing the hard work of changing their organization's work habits. Change is hard. Doing Agile well takes change. It's easier to get a certification and call it a day.
(Not bitter. Nooooo... not bitter at all. But so very tired of the bullshit.)
If folk want to learn a bit more about Scrum the Scrum Guide is a nice summary and not that much longer than Scott's mild oversimplification (http://www.scrum.org/Scrum-Guides).
(And since he's too polite to pimp it himself - James' book co-authored with Shane Warden is one of the ones I recommend to folk wanting to learn about agile http://www.jamesshore.com/Agile-Book/ - well worth a read if you're interested).
An upvote to you for probably saying what I was trying to in a more succinct manner. Sprinkle a little "agile" on top and call it a day, rather than rework the way things are done.
Diana Larsen and I sat down last year and wrote down all the different ways we saw people doing Agile, what worked, what didn't, and why so few teams were getting the promised benefits of what the agile movement promised, lo, those many years ago.
The nice version is here: http://www.agilefluency.com
The nasty (but much shorter) version is here: People care more about slapping the "Agile" label on their door than they care about doing the hard work of changing their organization's work habits. Change is hard. Doing Agile well takes change. It's easier to get a certification and call it a day.
(Not bitter. Nooooo... not bitter at all. But so very tired of the bullshit.)