According to a company trying to sell its Agile replacement.

What a shit measure. A key idea is to fail fast and fail often, as this leads to faster growth through more frequent (re)assessment.

SW companies only care about profit. If failure rate is 268% higher but profit is simultaneously 10% higher, then Agile is the better choice.

What is impact engineering though? If it's it's just agile while being cognisant of technical debt over MVPs, I don't know if it's necessarily that different.

It seems the study was designed to sell a book and I can't find anything about what that book says. I should probably read it but the bait way it's being sold makes me resistant to paying to find out.

The goddamn article you yourself posted as the proof mentions how it’s an ad right at the top

Even though the research commissioned by consultancy Engprax could be seen as a thinly veiled plug for Impact Engineering methodology, it feeds into the suspicion that the Agile Manifesto might not be all it's cracked up to be

It's much better to deliver useless projects afterall.