Thanks to éminence grise for pointing out the following:
Although the article is aimed at government, some of the conclusions are interesting. However, I do not agree that the “open standards” signal is being eclipse in general. There are many open initiatives still going strong (e.g., OSLC) in the IT world, but yes, agile is everywhere these days.
I also agree that in certain areas of IT, the best approach would be a merge of open standards and open source, being careful that the end users of those technologies are well represented within the respective development efforts, i.e., not just the companies offering tools and services for open standards and open source projects!
I also liked the following quote from the article:
Unfortunately, for all its undeniable strengths, agile is in danger of becoming a fetish, something imbued with additional symbolic charge over and above its actual meaning.
That is actually something I have started to see in some forums. Some agile gurus (“religious fanatics”) are often polarised and polarising in their approach, often conveniently forgetting some of the agile principles and part of the manifesto in order to further their cause. In all honesty, various process gurus over the years have done the same thing (e.g., some RUP gurus…) and the same kind of backlash may be happening to that agile community (and to the Lean community to a lesser extent).
Note that I am not against agile – I firmly believe it has its place – but I also believe that culture has an important part to play.