This has to be one of my favorite podcasts I've listened to. Literally laughed out loud.
While there were a ton of awesome key takeaways from the conversation, I think the biggest one for me was the tool working for the team instead of the team working within a tool. From my experience, every organization that has "implemented a tool" to assist their agile journey essentially turns it into a way of tracking/measuring productivity, scope completion, and scope planning, which is all useless measurements of value added. Not to mention, refinement meetings are extremely dry and boring when projecting stories onto a wall while everyone watches someone mistype multiple times and then eventually zoning out thinking about if they are going to finish their active sprint work.
Perhaps the survey should be worded in a way that asks the users how they operate/handle situations or scenarios instead of "do you use this or this". That way, the survey can derive their actual category of association and maturity instead of them having the false representation that they are adopting the agile mindset.
An example would be like a "scrum" respondant saying they do two week iterations, release quarterly, have PO engage 25% on project, and track velocity as their primary attribute of success. If a story is not finished in a sprint, they close it out and "re-point" the new story in the next sprint. They size defects to help plan towards velocity and actively demo to stakeholders once a month due to availability. I'd say that would be way information than just "we use scrum".
P.S. - I also used IBM Rational and wanted to stab my eyes out