What actually works are the development models proposed by Royce, the spiral model, DSDM, XP, and something like kanban (pull based) with the manifesto -- all based on the same core essentials: build to the outcome, prioritize learning, build through the unknowns, and deliver what you learned, all in a long term risk and long term RoE weighted way.*

Scaled Agile for Enterprise (SAFE), SCRUM, etc., generally don't accomplish this. Any methods that take waterfall and relabel it and add roles until executives are bamboozled into thinking it's Agile™, don't.

This is where waterfall probably came from:

- Royce, 1970: https://www.praxisframework.org/files/royce1970.pdf

While it's where "waterfall" came from, seems to be because someone stopped reading when they saw Figure 2.

Figure 2 is what not to do, he says it doesn't work. By contrast, he already understands principles such as prototype what works then document it, then build it again (Fig 7 Step 3 says make one to throw away) or ski with your customer (Fig. 9 Step 5 says keep tight with the customer), etc. Myth has it the DOD got excited about Figure 2 and ran with it. Most damagingly misunderstood software development paper ever?

- Spiral model: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_model

Prototypes with iterative scope and rigor until it's good enough. Sound familiar?

- DSDM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_systems_development_me...

Look at the 8 principles and especially the core techniques...

- XP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_programming

"Pairing" is why LLM code copilots "work".

* Easy to say.