"In the tech industry, we're never really sure which is more important: the tool, or how people use the tool."
"with many doubts that IT's not up to the task of transforming to the point where they can reliably create, refine, and run software"
Two statements that stand out, for me at least, why there is still issues with software despite it now becoming (has become?) a mature industry.
Ultimately it is the users and the consumers, of the software that should be put first. Because the software is pretty much that - the interface between a person and allowable actions, and data stored on objects and/or persons. If you forget that, then you will ultimately build your software in such a way that it will have flow paths that are at odds with what it will be used for.
Failing often, in my book, is not optional when you are dealing with either a critical system or confidential data. I think Agile gets a bad rap because there are lots of things that get ascribed to Agile, that are not really part of the 'manifesto'. Failing often, for example. The manifesto states Working software...
Agile got co-opted into a term which gets plastered over any shop's dev process as a way of saying 'me too', similar to the way TWAT™ gets used. It is a way to cover up having to explain what you really mean.
Anyway, i cringe when I see the term DevOps. I know plenty of Devs who shouldn't be allowed near infrastructure, and plenty of Ops that shouldn't program. There is different set of drivers for both, rightly so. Otherwise, if the be-all and end all was a jack of alltrades, then why do we have security professionals?