1. 5
  1. 6

    The question that nags is: why are employers across sectors willingly, even at considerable expense, instituting changes of this nature? Only one of two possible answers can suffice. The first is that these concessions are plain acts of benevolence on behalf of executives and shareholders, who aim to placate the legitimate malaise voiced by the artistic critique. The second is that a silent bargain between capital and wage-labour has occurred, with capital steadily shedding impediments to accumulation, and wage-earners forfeiting hard-won security in exchange for putative freedom.

    Or, here me out here, employers are adopting Agile because they genuinely think it’s good for the company.

    1. 3

      I wish we had more articles like these, where technology is put under the light of different perspectives. In the case of this very well written article, social, cultural and political lenses are applied. It’s a reminder that the changes we introduce, through technology or practice, have an impact and a meaning beyond the direct goal we’re trying to achieve. Agile was primarily born out of the challenge of ever changing requirements, but carried much more than addressing that one issue.

      1. 2

        Kinda surprised to see a link from the New Left Review here, but apparently it’s not the first:

        https://lobste.rs/s/r8fpre/talking_mailman