Why Agile Coaching Has Developed a Bad Reputation in Recent Years

Agile coaching emerged as a key role during the rise of Agile methodologies in the early 2000s. Initially, Agile was intended to transform the way software development was managed, focusing on flexibility, team collaboration, and customer-centric approaches. 

However, as Agile coaching gained prominence, particularly in large organizations, its reputation began to suffer. This decline in credibility is linked to a range of factors, including the commercialisation of Agile coaching, the imposition of rigid frameworks like SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework), and a shift away from the core principles that initially made Agile effective.


How Agile Coaching emerged

Agile coaching evolved as organisations transitioned to Agile practices such as Scrum, Kanban, and Extreme Programming. The role of an Agile coach was initially envisioned as a supportive one, focused on helping teams and individuals adopt Agile values and practices. Drawing from roots in coaching and mentoring, Agile coaches were expected to guide teams through self-organisation, problem-solving, and continuous improvement.

Early Agile coaches typically had a strong foundation in both technical expertise and leadership. They worked closely with teams to foster a culture of collaboration, helping organisations embrace Agile principles and adapt them to their specific needs. The intention was genuine: to ensure teams could work more effectively, deliver high-quality products, and respond to change.

At its core, Agile coaching was aligned with principles of coaching and mentoring. It emphasised listening, guiding, and encouraging teams to develop their own solutions. It wasn’t about imposing rigid processes but about helping teams grow in their Agile maturity, becoming self-sufficient in delivering value.

The Shift: Commercialisation and Large-Scale Frameworks

However, as Agile methodologies grew in popularity, especially in larger organisations, Agile coaching became increasingly commercialised. Certification programs multiplied, often focusing more on ticking boxes than truly embodying Agile principles. Many Agile coaches became certified after a short course and a few exams, often lacking the deep experience required to truly mentor teams through complex organisational challenges.

Simultaneously, large-scale Agile frameworks such as SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework) began to dominate the corporate landscape. While frameworks like SAFe were designed to help organisations adopt Agile practices at scale, they often introduced a level of bureaucracy that directly contradicted the flexibility and autonomy that Agile was meant to provide.

In particular, SAFe has been criticised for turning Agile into a top-down, process-heavy system. Rather than empowering teams, SAFe often imposes a rigid structure, including hierarchical roles and predefined workflows, which can stifle creativity and autonomy. The introduction of layers of management and predefined sprints can make Agile feel more like the traditional waterfall approach it sought to replace, leading to disillusionment among teams and a growing perception that Agile—and by extension, Agile coaching—had lost its way.

The Erosion of Agile’s Core Values

One of the fundamental reasons Agile coaching has developed a bad reputation in recent years is the perceived shift away from Agile’s core values. Instead of focusing on customer collaboration, responding to change, and empowering teams, Agile has sometimes become a buzzword used to justify implementing complex frameworks like SAFe, which can feel prescriptive and inflexible.

This has led to situations where Agile coaches, instead of guiding teams in self-organisation, have become enforcers of frameworks. In such environments, Agile coaching is seen as a means of ensuring compliance with a predefined set of rules, rather than encouraging teams to evolve their practices based on what works best for them. When coaching becomes less about guiding teams and more about enforcing processes, it undermines the original purpose of the role.

Furthermore, Agile coaches often face pressure from executives who expect immediate, quantifiable results from Agile transformations. This focus on quick wins can lead to superficial implementations, where teams go through the motions of Agile without fully adopting its mindset. As a result, the true value of Agile coaching—developing teams, fostering continuous improvement, and enabling long-term success—gets lost.


The Future of Agile Coaching

Despite its current challenges, Agile coaching is still valuable when practiced with integrity. The best Agile coaches focus on fostering collaboration, helping teams navigate complex problems, and supporting the long-term growth of organisations. However, for Agile coaching to regain its credibility, it must distance itself from the commercialisation of certifications and large-scale frameworks that dilute Agile’s core values.


Agile coaches need to return to the fundamentals of coaching: listening, guiding, and empowering teams to take ownership of their processes. Organisations, in turn, must resist the temptation to implement Agile at scale using cookie-cutter approaches like SAFe without considering whether those frameworks align with their specific needs.

In conclusion, I'd say that Agile coaching has developed a bad reputation because of its association with rigid frameworks, the commercialisation of certifications, and a drift away from Agile’s original principles. However, when practiced with care and attention to its roots, Agile coaching can still be an incredibly powerful tool for fostering effective, adaptable teams and organisations.