An observation. Agilists are better at explaining waterfall than Agile. Most Agile textbooks start by explaining waterfall ,and then explain Agile through the lens of waterfall. This approach is the source of much confusion. First of all, you don't need waterfall to explain Agile.
The term "agile priests" from M3.0 comes to mind when reading this. I agree to your observation.. Sadly because of how I sometimes feel about myself when not being able to perfectly describe complex VS complicated in all the flavors needed at times. I think all "agile certs" should be at least 50% based on getting the "why" behind.. And how to explain it with systems thinking.
The term "agile priests" from M3.0 comes to mind when reading this. I agree to your observation.. Sadly because of how I sometimes feel about myself when not being able to perfectly describe complex VS complicated in all the flavors needed at times. I think all "agile certs" should be at least 50% based on getting the "why" behind.. And how to explain it with systems thinking.
TIL Auftragstaktik - entering rabbit hole shortly.
Good article as always, Maarten. Then, how would you describe agile?