The region I live in is currently very enamored with Scrum, so almost every organization claims to use it, until you start talking to them. Then they'll say something like "modified Scrum" or "incorporating agile methodologies" and when you get right down to it you're looking at something like waterfall with continuous deployment. As such I never trust surveys as to who is using agile methodologies, because in my experience a great number of organizations claim they are, but aren't.
I've only really experienced one organization (it's a large one) that really uses Scrum and it's fairly debatable if it's a benefit or not. Communication between the team and product owner is the primary advantage of Scrum and in the case of boxed software, the product owner is often pretty detached from the end user and may not really understand what they want.
I know this is a long post, but the point I'm trying to make here is that Scrum has a lot of advantages, but it's not a one size fits all solution. Right now Scrum and to a lesser extent Agile methods in general are the current fad. I think it's going to take at least 10 years before we can look back at this and evaluate what does and doesn't work about agile and either develop the next big software development fad or improve knowledge of agile techniques to the point where claiming to be "agile" and then not actually doing so will yield a lot of negative backlash, unlike today.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
