True: Some teams got it right!
The Scrum society was successful with their marketing and Scrum training.
Extreme Programming had gotten popular, pair programming was the new black. User stories and use cases took over from the detailed Requirements Specifications.
Crystal Clear popped up (my favorite at that time for small teams). The announced Crystal Orange book (how to scale) never came.
More and more teams got it “right” – whatever that meant.
Other so-called software processes like Adaptive, RUP, etc. were published. The message was understood: Both an iterative and incremental approach is necessary. That message was also taken in by some formally authorized decision makers.
Executives started to acknowledge agile because they could see some financial benefits from development teams using it.
And the IT guys became better at communicating the benefits of changing from the traditional waterfall projects that hardly delivered what was needed, into working in sprints demonstrating working solutions at a regular basis.
Some teams were forced to work agile against their will.
"This was never the intention" co-writer of the Agile Manifesto Martin Fowler said on his blog post "The agile Imposition" around 2006 (link).
The problem of imposition is elaborated in the essay "The Agile Industrial Complex" by Daniel Mezick here.