Any method/framework that is based on a "Manifesto" is despicable. The Manifesto gives the sense of entitlement of a moral standing. The principles become moral principles, and produce a Manichean divide between the new (good ones) and the old (bad ones), undermining any hope of truly collaborative work places based on trust and purpose.

Rather than moral principles, I prefer to base all discourse on scientific principles.

And those moral principles, deemed to be good, can be taken as assumptions. Assumptions can be questioned. Improved. Even replaced.

A manifesto and the holy writings like the Scrum Guide are unquestionable and give rise to dogma, tribalism, and all sorts of psychotic reality distortion perspectives.

If you're tired of Scrum, Manifestos and Holy Guides, there are better alternatives which foster much more humane, sustainable and collaborative working environments. I invite you to check out my TameFlow Approach.

Ask anything if you want to know more.

Constructive / progressive organizations can be built or transformed into, where collaborative knowledge-work happens at all levels.

Scrum is a parody and pretty much anti-agile.

Traditional organizations are driven by the cost-accounting mindset that creates gate-keepers and makes it impossible to share a common purpose, let alone collaborate across teams, units or vertically.

Pardon me for blowing my own horn, but as an alternative to all the usual approaches (Scrum, Kanban, SAFe, LeSS, etc.), for software engineering management at scale, my I suggest my own "TameFlow Approach"

It is based on Patterns and the Theory of Constraints.