> Agile is a way to save developers in orgs where it's normal for the sales guy to come in to a team's room and announce that they sold feature X to a client already and it needs to be delivered next Friday.
How does it do that? If the sales guy sold feature X to a client you're going to have to build it -- Scrum be damned. Some process is going to get in the way of making money? I don't think so.
That's why it only works properly when there is FULL buy-in from the C-level down.
EVERYONE in the company must acknowledge that there is a clear process on how to get new features implemented and randomly barging into the team space demanding features is not it.
But I don't need Scrum to get buy in of non-shitty processes from the C-level down. I have that already without Scrum. Clearly people are doing Scrum that is awful. So it's neither a necessary nor sufficient property of Scrum itself.
I agree that not having management/sales directly involved in low-level development planning is a good. But that's not Scrum.
How does it do that? If the sales guy sold feature X to a client you're going to have to build it -- Scrum be damned. Some process is going to get in the way of making money? I don't think so.