I’ve come to the conclusion that about 75% of agile projects are for organizations that want more certainty, and have translated general industry enthusiasm for the brand into “Agile == Fast and Good”.
It’s hard to blame them, honestly, because a lot of the philosophy of Agile is wrapped up in the idea that letting devs be devs instead of planners and documenters and so on will bypass org dysfunction. True for certain kinds of projects and certain kinds of teams, but…
…Definitely not true for everything. @swardley writes a lot about that distinction, the kinds of scenarios where agile and lean and (God help us!) more traditional discover-plan-build cycles are a better fit.
The end result is that most agencies and vendors have given up selling “Agile” as an approach and just use sprints and CI and standups etc as a structural framework for maintaining cadence on a large project.
That isn’t a damning indictment, at least not in my mind, just a testament to the power of the agile brand. That cycle has brought some real process improvements to more traditional projects! But also a lot of theater.