Method versus Methodology: An argument predating Scrum

The debate regarding methods and methodology is nothing new.

Discussing Albert Einstein in the second course of his Gifford Lectures at Edinburgh, Professor Stanley L. Jaki drew an important distinction between the great physicist's method and his methodology.

According to Jaki, Einstein represented himself as an advocate of "sensationism"—the view that the existence of an objective cosmos underlying the subjective sensations of the physicist was impossible—yet Einstein's discoveries of special and general relativity was the result of Einstein's conviction of the existence of a universal natural order—something understandable only in a manner independent of man's cultural or historical position at the time.

In other words: the manner of Einstein's approach to reality (his methods) was not consistent with his approach to reality (his methodology).

The recent arguments within the Scrum community are just as futile. It's true that many—myself included—often misuse the terms, but does it really matter?

Let's take a look at the American Heritage dictionary's definitions of the terms:

"method: A means or manner of procedure; especially, a regular and systematic way of accomplishing anything.

methodology: The system of principles, practices, and procedures applied to any specific branch of knowledge..."

Given these definitions, methodology includes method. Method is "a means or manner of procedure". Methodology includes "principles, practices, and procedure."

From this perspective, Scrum is no more than a collection of methods. However, without the methodologies of inspection, adaption, and transparency, there would be no cohesive team, and without the cohesive team, there is no Scrum.