There’s a belief in our industry that if you just “go Agile,” all your software woes will vanish. Swap out Gantt charts for sprints, hold daily stand-ups, and voilà, projects deliver themselves. Reality is much messier. Projects don’t succeed by magic, and teams aren’t assembly lines that you can reprogram overnight. I’ve seen teams adopt every Scrum ceremony in the book and still end up in chaos. Sprints turn into a hamster wheel. Backlogs grow without ever getting “done.” People attend all the meetings: stand-ups, planning, retrospectives, yet nothing really changes. Features get built and rebuilt, but nobody’s truly proud of the end result. And eventually, the team wears itself down, exhausted and confused about why “Agile” didn’t live up to the hype.
Even today, Agile is still everywhere and still misunderstood. Remote teams, AI-driven workflows, and constant marketplace shifts only sharpen the need for real agility. Yet the same mistakes echo: adopting rituals without results, chasing velocity instead of value, and wondering why things derail faster. If you’re feeling that strain, you’re not alone, and you’re not stuck.
If this sounds familiar, you’re not alone. Many of us, developers, product managers, and even executives, have scars from well-intentioned Agile adoptions gone wrong. In fact, studies have found Agile transformation failure rates as high as 84% in organizations. That means a lot of smart people out there are feeling the pain of “Agile” projects that delivered frustration instead of freedom. The truth is, cross-functional collaboration and iterative development are hard. Simply declaring “we’re Agile now!” doesn’t magically fix deep organizational dysfunction. In some cases, it even makes the dysfunction louder.
Why does this keep happening? How did a methodology founded on flexibility and collaboration turn into a source of stress? To find answers, let’s look at what “bad” Agile looks like in the real world and why it emerges. We’ll dig into a couple of high-profile fiascos (and a few everyday team struggles) not to point fingers, but to recognize the patterns. Only then can we talk about how to set things right, for real this time.
One painful example is the Surrey Police’s SIREN project in the mid-2000s, which spiraled out of control for eight years and cost £15 million before being scrapped. The police, with zero Agile experience, treated “responding to change” as “don’t plan at all.” Developers sprinted in circles without pausing to regroup, and none of the modules actually got accepted by users. Auditors found SIREN was “Agile” in name only, and it ultimately collapsed under its own weight.
Another infamous case is the UK’s Universal Credit program, a multi-billion-pound welfare system overhaul that floundered after 2013. Despite the “Agile” buzz, the Department for Work and Pensions stuck to huge fixed contracts and a top-down culture, prompting one consultant to say, “We were effectively on a waterfall project.” By 2017 (later slipping to 2023), insiders called the software “fundamentally broken.” It’s a classic example of bolting Agile lingo onto an organization that refused to let go of old habits.
These may be big public failures, but the same patterns play out in countless everyday teams. I recall a product team I worked with years ago, a talented group of developers, designers, and a new Scrum Master eager to do things right. We dived head-first into two-week sprints, stood up our daily stand-ups, and moved our sticky notes dutifully across the board. At first, it felt exciting. But a few months in, a troubling rhythm set in. We’d plan a sprint around vaguely defined features (because “responding to change over following a plan,” right?). We’d scramble to demo something by the review, only to realize the goalposts had moved or the “MVP” was misunderstood. Every retro, we’d promise to improve, yet in the next sprint, we’d hit the same walls. It started to feel like we were iterating in circles. Lots of activity, not enough actual progress. Morale sank. I still remember one of the designers sighed, “I’m working the same feature again, didn’t we pivot away from it last sprint?” The devs exchanged helpless looks. We were exhausted, but no one wanted to admit we had no clear direction. People joked that “Agile” had just become micro-management in disguise: now we got to fail faster, and more often. We were all frustrated. This wasn’t what Agile was supposed to be.
It’s easy to blame the methodology or the people, but the reality is more nuanced. Agile fails in practice for a mix of reasons, usually rooted in how it’s implemented (or mis-implemented). Here are some of the common culprits that I’ve experienced and observed firsthand:
Many teams adopt the outer rituals of Agile — the stand-ups, the story points, the sprints, the retros, without understanding why those practices exist. It’s Agile by checklist. We’ve all seen it: the daily stand-up that becomes an aimless status meeting, the retro where nothing substantial changes afterward, the obsession with velocity numbers divorced from actual customer value. When a team is just going through the motions, Agile turns into a shallow ceremony. The heart (rapid feedback, learning, and adaptation) gets lost.
Agile principles assume a certain level of trust and autonomy. Teams are supposed to be self-organizing and empowered to make decisions to reach their goals. But in organizations with a heavy top-down culture, that empowerment never really happens. Management still expects rigid roadmaps and fixed scope, just delivered in “agile” increments. Team members don’t feel safe to speak up when something’s wrong. (In the SIREN project, for example, neither the vendor nor the client felt they could stop the line when those early modules went unused.) Without trust, Agile devolves into an exercise in CYA (“cover your ass”). Lots of documentation and burndown charts to keep up appearances, but no candid conversations about the real problems.
Agile seems simple on paper, but doing it well requires skill, especially at scale. In both cases above, the organizations had little to no prior experience with Agile, and it showed. They underestimated the learning curve. It’s like deciding to climb Everest when you’ve only hiked a hill. You’re in for a world of hurt. I’ve seen companies dive into Agile because “everyone’s doing it,” without investing in training or coaching. Teams stumble, projects derail, and then Agile gets the blame. The lesson is obvious in hindsight: start small, learn the ropes. If you’ve never done Agile, maybe don’t bet your £15 million police system or $2 billion welfare program on figuring it out as you go.
Perhaps the biggest Agile killer is trying to cram an iterative, flexible approach into an organization that’s rigid and siloed. You can’t just rename your Project Managers as “Scrum Masters” and call it a day. If the finance department still demands five-year cost projections or procurement locks you into inflexible vendor contracts, you’re not really agile. Universal Credit’s fate underscored this, the government tried to do Agile with fixed scope contracts to massive vendors, a complete mismatch. Similarly, I’ve seen companies attempt to “scale Agile” by layering a ton of bureaucracy on top. They get the worst of both worlds: the complexity of a large-scale process with none of the agility. It’s like putting a Lamborghini engine in a tank. It’s not going to run right.
Agile’s all about learning from failure fast. But that only works if your culture allows failure in the first place. In many struggling Agile teams, there’s a silent fear of admitting things aren’t working. So problems get swept under the rug. Teams keep committing to unrealistic sprint goals because they feel pressure to “look productive.” Stakeholders keep pushing new priorities each sprint because they have no patience for the team to finish the last thing. This churn creates a constant sense of failure, but no one calls it out constructively. Over time, that fear and denial create a huge gap between the Agile theory on paper and the messy reality on the ground.
Of course, this list isn’t exhaustive. Every troubled Agile adoption has its own flavor of dysfunction. But usually, it’s some cocktail of these factors. The tragedy is that it’s rarely the people on the team who are “bad”. More often, they’re set up to fail by a system that misunderstands what Agile is about, or that isn’t truly willing to change old habits.
…Agile is not a quick fix for a dysfunctional team or organization. It won’t automatically make bad products good or broken cultures healthy.
It’s Not Agile’s Fault… But It’s on Us to Fix
Reading all this, you might wonder: “Is Agile just a failed experiment?” Should we go back to the waterfall? I don’t believe so. The core ideas of Agile — iterate quickly, get feedback, work closely with users, adapt as you learn — are still incredibly powerful. When Agile works, it’s fantastic. Many teams have used it to deliver great products faster and respond to change with grace. So the problem isn’t Agile per se, it’s how we’ve watered it down and warped it in practice. The term “Agile” itself has been co-opted and overused to the point of meaninglessness. It’s become a buzzword, a corporate panacea sold by big consultancies and tool vendors. We’ve lost the plot, and in doing so, lost trust in what Agile can actually do.
So, how do we reclaim agility from the jaws of “Agile™”? How can we make it work as intended? As a help, not a hindrance? I won’t pretend there are easy answers (if there were, we wouldn’t be in this mess). But from my experience, a few brutally honest truths stand out for finding a way forward:
There is no agile silver bullet. Scrum isn’t a magic cure; Kanban isn’t either; SAFe certainly isn’t. Any framework or method must be adapted to your team’s context. Maybe your project does need a bit more upfront architecture thinking. Fine, do that. Maybe your team finds two-week sprints too rigid, try one-week or four-week, or use a Kanban flow. The point is to honor the principle of agile (respond to change, frequently deliver value) rather than fetishize the form. Give teams the freedom to experiment with their process. As a leader, judge them by outcomes and customer impact, not whether they followed Scrum Guide v12 to the letter.
I’ve never seen an Agile adoption succeed in a vacuum. It requires support from the top, not just lip service, but real understanding. If executives treat Agile as just a new way to squeeze teams for more output, it will fail. Leaders need to educate themselves on agile values. They need to allow teams to fail safely, to adjust scope when learning dictates, to prioritize technical debt sometimes instead of new features. Basically, leadership must create an environment where Agile principles can thrive. That might mean changing how budgeting works, or how you reward teams (reward collaboration and solving customer problems, not just hitting arbitrary deadlines). When leadership truly supports agility, teams feel it, and they thrive.
Agile is people-centric at its core (remember “individuals and interactions over processes and tools”?). So invest in your people. Train them, yes, but more importantly, trust them. Good teams, given clarity on goals, will figure out amazing ways to overcome obstacles. I’ve seen teams do miracles when they knew their leaders had their backs. Conversely, I’ve seen teams go through Agile motions with dead eyes when every decision needed sign-off and every mistake was punished. Trust fuels the feedback loop that Agile depends on. It lets a developer say, “This approach isn’t working, let’s try something else” without fear. It lets a product owner admit “Users hated this feature” and pivot. Without trust, no framework will save you. With trust, even a mediocre process can shine.
At the end of the day, Agile is a means to an end. Delivering value to customers/stakeholders faster and better. When teams focus on that north star, the rituals tend to naturally adjust. I encourage teams to regularly ask: “How did we improve the user’s life this iteration?”, “What did we learn about their needs?” If those answers are blurry, all the burndown charts in the world won’t save you. The teams that knock it out of the park keep a tight feedback loop with their users or business. They ship small, observe, talk to real users, and iterate based on that. That’s true agility, not how many story points you finished, but how quickly you validated a hypothesis or solved a user problem. Keeping that purpose front and center cuts through a lot of the nonsense. It also tends to energize the team because work feels meaningful, not just a race to the sprint’s end.
Above all, we need to be patient and persistent. Turning around a broken Agile practice is itself an iterative journey. It might take months or years of unlearning bad habits and building new norms. There will be cynicism to overcome (likely well-earned from past failures). But bit by bit, success breeds success. I’ve watched a demoralized team slowly regain confidence after leadership gave them air cover to pause and reshape their process. We started delivering small wins, a tricky bug solved here, a user delighting in a new tweak there, and celebrating those. The conversation shifted from “Are we following Agile right?” to “Are we delivering value right?”. When that shift happens, it’s like clouds parting. Agile stops being a four-letter word and starts being just how you work — adaptive, collaborative, and yes, maybe even fun again.
Quick Check: Signs You’re Stuck in ‘Bad Agile’
Where to Start Fixing It
… Agile is a means to an end, not an end in itself…It’s about creating a working rhythm where teams can deliver useful things incrementally, learn from feedback, and adapt nimbly to change.
The messy reality is that Agile is not a quick fix for a dysfunctional team or organization. It won’t automatically make bad products good or broken cultures healthy. In fact, as we’ve seen, misapplying Agile can make things worse, amplifying confusion and burnout. But done with care, Agile can still be a game-changer. The key is to remember that Agile is a means to an end, not an end in itself. It was never about “implementing Scrum” or chasing KPIs for sprint velocity. It’s about creating a working rhythm where teams can deliver useful things incrementally, learn from feedback, and adapt nimbly to change. That’s even more crucial in 2025, when fully remote teams, AI-assisted coding, and rapid market shifts make iterative adaptation non-negotiable. There’s no rigid recipe here, just guiding principles and a lot of hard-earned lessons.
As an industry, it’s time for a bit of brutal honesty. Let’s call out the dysfunction where we see it: the fake Agile theater, the lack of alignment, the fear-driven deadlines masquerading as sprints. No more Agile in name only. At the same time, let’s not throw away the good along with the bad. The answer to “bad Agile” isn’t to retreat to the old ways or to cynically declare everything Agile as fluff. It’s to reclaim agility by doing the hard, unglamorous work that the buzzwords can’t do for us, like building trust, refining practices through trial and error, and keeping our eyes firmly on delivering real value.
In my experience, the teams that ultimately win, consistently turn ideas into impactful products, aren’t the ones that check every Agile box or have the fanciest tools. They’re the ones that embrace the spirit of agility without getting lost in the dogma. They question themselves in retrospectives and actually act on the answers. They make sure everyone understands the mission and then give people the freedom to achieve it. They balance discipline with creativity, planning with adaptation. These teams might still use Scrum or Kanban, or some homemade hybrid. It doesn’t really matter, because what drives them is deeper.
If you’re stuck in an Agile swamp right now, know that it doesn’t have to stay that way. Start with small changes, have an honest conversation in your next retro about what’s wasting everyone’s time. Share this with your boss or your team and say, “This is what it is right now. Can we try a different approach?” Remember that Agile was meant to serve us, not the other way around. We can take it back. Bit by bit, sprint by sprint, we can turn this ship around. And when we do, it won’t even be a question of “Agile or not?” It’ll just be how we collaboratively build things that matter, in a way that doesn’t burn us out. That, ultimately, is the promise of Agile. It’s still ours to claim, messy reality and all.
If this piece was helpful or resonated with you, you can support my work by buying me a Coffee!
Become a subscriber receive the latest updates in your inbox.
Member discussion