Also, "productivity hack" is not a label I'd use to describe e.g. automated testing. YMMV.
Also, "productivity hack" is not a label I'd use to describe e.g. automated testing. YMMV.
I can't prove it. And I do like iterations in the sense of "produce a deliverable product every N weeks" for keeping you from wandering too far down the wrong path, though from what I've seen one of the most popular things to do with agile is just break your calender up by "iterations" then keep doing the same thing you did before. It's sort of hard to get a real sense of the utility of agile because hardly anybody really seems to really try it. (I do not necessarily think every aspect of it should be kept, but much of what it proposes is at least worth a real try. And "trying" shouldn't be a matter of smearing new words over the same procedures.)
The hypothesis under discussion here isn't "these principles have value", it's "even though implementing these principles gave measurable value, they're still snake oil comparable to scientology".