"The simple rests upon the difficult" - Theodore Ayrault Dodge
I have often observed that many software engineering techniques or methods that aim to simplify actually just push complexity around rather than actually resolving anything.
As Fred Brooks has already told us: There is no silver bullet.
For example, I once came across a software development process that mandated the creation of elaborate and detailed specification documents together with an extremely formal and rigid process for translating those specifications into executable source documents (code).
The author of the process proudly claimed that his development method would eliminate all coding errors (implying that the majority of bugs are mere typos in the transliteration of specification to application logic).
To me, this seemed like hubris, as it pushes the burden from the software engineer (who in this scheme is reduced to a mere automaton) to the individual writing the specification, who (in the process) takes on the role of developer; (absent the tools and feedback needed to actually do the job well).
Thus, whilst approaches like this might help bloat costs and fuel the specsmanship games that blight certain (nameless) industrial sectors, they do nothing whatsoever to help developers produce higher quality product with less effort.
We do not make progress by pushing complexity around. We make progress by consuming it and taming it. We need to do the work and tackle the problem to make things happen.
Rather than focus on the silver bullet of simplification, we would be better served by processes, methods and tools that explicitly acknowledge the development feedback loop, and aim to tighten and broaden it through automation.