A philosophy that hinges around some ideal of how the world should be, rather than dealing with the world as it really is, often ends up being implemented as the exact opposite of that ideal. I can think of some historical parallels...
Call it "fraud SCRUM because it sells so well" or "lipstick SCRUM so we look cool" or "didn't read SCRUM but we have meetings and sprints". SCRUM works, maybe not for everyone but this denies us a chance.
So often it is PM who destroys project. I've seen good PMs. Two. Great guys. Great managers protects project from upper management and helps to resolve teams disputes. Others... They are like third wheel - developers like to build, business knows what to build, managers - exercise control.
How true! In my 30 years in the industry, I haven't experienced a single PM who was a net-positive (though I've heard that some are awesome), and some that simply made no positive contribution whatsoever.
I had one program manager who was awesome, even though we certainly didn't need a program manager (~40 person startup) per se. But she realized what was going on and then kept the PM (and everyone else) off my back so I could get the job done.
First and AFAIK only time in that company's history that a software project was delivered on-time.
Of course, after we shipped, it was all "congrats, but now you must do things properly like the rest of the company".
Not sure whether that's "sigh" or "LOL" or ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Why discussion is about Scrum, not Scrum tools application and awful project management? The language is subverted, why do you help it?