Oddball descriptions of how Agile projects work. Suggestions for how Agile teams can survive in a hostile environment.
* Agile projects as gift economies. "Business value" as a boundary object that symbolizes relationships between people. Like the Christian cross or other religious or cultural symbols, the invocation of "business value" is a reminder to do the right thing more than a literal depiction of value in a transactional economy. Things go wrong when it's treated as more real than it is.
* A contrast between "the stance of reaction" (analogized to the Argentine Tango) and "the stance of reduction." The stance of reduction deals with complexity by reducing it to some abstraction or simplicity that is more intellectually (or emotionally) tractable. The stance of reaction is one in which you prime and train yourself to react appropriately to complex situations. (This is similar to the distinction between tacit expert knowledge and explicit knowledge.) Agile is notable for relying on the stance of reaction far more than technical fields usually do. It's a strength that should be conserved.
* A tango lesson.
* Enterprise Agile as a form of colonialism. Dissing the idea of servant leadership.
* Some futile (yet fact-based!) argumentation against personality psychology (such as Myers-Briggs type indicators) in favor of situational psychology. The argument is that the context (the environment) has far more power to shape actions than does the kind of personality traits that are measured in tests. The suggestion is that it's more important for us to engineer the environment to encourage appropriate behavior than it is to worry about things like "introverts don't like to pair".
The MBTI mafia stopped recording in the middle of the discussion of situational psychology, depriving you of a description of a really interesting experiment. Also, the conclusion of the talk is missing.