After reading this article all that remained was an unpleasant aftertaste from self-aggrandizing and arrogant delivery.

But perhaps I don't pass the bar to be considered an intended audience this was meant to be addressed to.

Signed, C# developer.

A fluff piece where he doesn't actually show examples of why it doesn't work but only boasts about how great the stuff he made was and how badly everyone messed it up.

Sounds like another example of an organization that doesn't understand what "agile" means and assumes "agile == cowboy coding with no rigor at all". But that is not true. There is nothing prescriptive in the Agile Manifesto that says you can't (or shouldn't) do: up-front design, code reviews, architectural standards, code standards, etc. What the Agile Manifesto is saying, at heart, is that you shouldn't be doing those things simply as ceremony, or treating them as an end goal in their own right.

IOW, "Agile" was a reaction to bureaucracy heavy methodologies that were highly prescriptive and loaded with ceremony of dubious value. Getting rid of that stuff is the essence of Agile in many ways. BUT... that doesn't mean you can't keep the stuff that actually adds value in your organization. And that's maybe the biggest point of all: "Your Agile isn't my Agile". Agile at Jet may result in an approach that looks completely different than Agile at Fogbeam, or IBM, or Google, or $WHATEVER.

Let's look at the first part of the Agile Manifesto:

    We are uncovering better ways of developing
    software by doing it and helping others do it.
    Through this work we have come to value:

    Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
    Working software over comprehensive documentation
    Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
    Responding to change over following a plan

    That is, *while there is value in the items on
    the right*, we value the items on the left more.

Emphasis added.

Now let's look at the 12 Principles of Agile:

    We follow these principles:

    Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer
    through early and continuous delivery
    of valuable software.

    Welcome changing requirements, even late in
    development. Agile processes harness change for
    the customer's competitive advantage.

    Deliver working software frequently, from a
    couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a
    preference to the shorter timescale.

    Business people and developers must work
    together daily throughout the project.

    Build projects around motivated individuals.
    Give them the environment and support they need,
    and trust them to get the job done.

    The most efficient and effective method of
    conveying information to and within a development
    team is face-to-face conversation.

    Working software is the primary measure of progress.

    Agile processes promote sustainable development.
    The sponsors, developers, and users should be able
    to maintain a constant pace indefinitely.

    Continuous attention to technical excellence
    and good design enhances agility.

    Simplicity--the art of maximizing the amount
    of work not done--is essential.

    The best architectures, requirements, and designs
    emerge from self-organizing teams.

    At regular intervals, the team reflects on how
    to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts
    its behavior accordingly. 

Notice what's not there: time boxed iterations, "sprints", "collective code ownership", daily standups, "scrums", "planning poker", rejection of design and/or architecture, rejection of code reviews, etc., etc.

Also pay extra attention to the last principle:

    At regular intervals, the team reflects on how
    to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts
    its behavior accordingly. 

This is why "My Agile isn't your Agile". Teams self-tune and adjust to fit their environment. And you have a LOT of freedom to do that. Notice how little of this is prescriptive.

I think the real problem is this: People adopt a half-baked software development methodology, loosely based on a handful of ideas taken from Scrum and/or XP, and maybe a cursory reading of the Agile Manifesto, call it "agile" and then proceed to do haphazard slap-dash development and then when things get fucked up, they blame "Agile".

This is so wrong... Agile does NOT mean "do whatever the fuck you want with no planning, no architecture, no coding standards, no reviews, no design, etc."