I find Scrum stand up meetings humiliating

[NotAllThere]

How do you know what stuff to just do, without any methodology? You must have one even if you aren;t particularly aware of it.

Methodology means a set of defined rules and procedures for regulating a task or set of tasks. The opposite of working to a methodology would be something like working ad-hoc. I don't see "I don't work to a methodology" as a nonsensical statement. You can't do R&D by following a methodology.

[tomtomagain]

You can't do R&D by following a methodology.

Of course you can. Do you think that DARPA, SpaceX, GSK, Google et al don't have some sort of methodology? They are all doing R&D.

A methodology ( or "processes" ) is just short-hand for "How we do stuff around here".

If you don't adhere to any processes or methodology you are effectively saying, I am going to work in a random, unstructured manner with no predictable results, no oversight and no control.

I am developing a product by myself. Even I have a practise a methodology. Otherwise stuff would never get done.

Of course in a large corporate environment you may feel the processes and methodology get in the way of you progressing.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Methodology means a set of defined rules and procedures for regulating a task or set of tasks. The opposite of working to a methodology would be something like working ad-hoc. I don't see "I don't work to a methodology" as a nonsensical statement. You can't do R&D by following a methodology.

There will be a methodology, even if it's not particularly well defined or rigorous. Without one you wouldn't even know what work to do in an ad-hoc fashion.

[mrv]

Is there anyone else on this forum who just "does stuff"?

Methodologies to me always look like a way of using the technical equivalent of management speak as a substitute for just doing things.

If the "stuff" you're doing takes more than a few man-hours, you need a methodology of some sort. Even the "give your variables names that are descriptive and meaningful" rule is a methodology already. Splitting tasks like "I can code, so I will code, you can talk to people, so go out and find what they want" is methodology, very rudimentary, but still methodology. Small tasks, one or two man bands could get away with things like these, but as the tasks get more complex one needs more complex rules to keep the lid on the thing.

Project management is absurdly simple when you look at it: find out what needs to be done, in what way or sequence, what is needed as materials etc, decide who will do it and when, and off you go. All those things like waterfall, scrum, lean etc are just different approaches to the same thing, like one team plays 4-4-2, and the other likes 4-1-4-1. The first one is not inherently better than the second, nor it is worse. Bad team could choose any and still lose, but not because the system is bad, but because they cannot do their tasks properly. So if one cannot plan, nothing will save him, but some things might help him fail less spectacularly.