What is the difference between Agile and Waterfall development?

Waterfall Development - I build a beautiful garden by detailed planning, sketching out the entire layout, selecting plants, determining the exact placement of each flower bed. I plant seeds, watering them, and patiently waiting for each plant to grow all at once. Agile Methodology - Instead of planning every detail upfront, I start with a small patch, plant a variety of seeds, observe how they grow, and adapt my garden based on their progress, like nurturing an evolving ecosystem, adapting to the environment and making ongoing improvements based on what I learnt. First garden might be a success but second will be a sure success ecosystem.

A waterfall approach isn’t only used in software development. A similar approach is also used in the medical device sector and other regulated industries. If managed correctly, it does not need to create silos between different teams and stakeholders as this outcome is not inherent to the approach itself. Effective project management and communication strategies can mitigate this risk. When teams maintain open channels of communication, share insights and collaborate across phases, the waterfall approach can foster a cohesive working environment. Furthermore, clear project documentation and well-defined phases can ensure that information flows smoothly, reducing the risk of silos.

Waterfall development is like following a strict plan when making software. It's good for clear projects but not so quick to change if needed. Imagine building a house – you start with the foundation, then walls, add the roof, and finally, decorate inside. Waterfall development is a bit like that; each phase has to be completed before moving on to the next, creating a step-by-step progression.

Agile vs. Waterfall: Waterfall is linear, completing one phase before the next. Agile is iterative, delivering increments and adapting continuously. Example: Developing a mobile app - Waterfall completes all phases sequentially, while Agile releases a minimum viable product first, gathering feedback for continuous refinement, enabling quicker response to market needs.

Agile focuses on iterative development focused on releases at specific intervals while waterfall focuses more on full development and a single release cycle. Agile is useful for cases when requirements are evolving and rapid iteration is needed to gather early customer feedback. In such cases you have a fair idea of what the customer wants but you need validation at every stage to reinforce the solution. Waterfall is preferable when requirements are fully clear and scoped and there is very little chance for scope creep. In such cases, you know the exact solution and build for it and expect the customer to align with it fully.

In my experience, Agile is not a strict framework. It has 12 principles as it's foundation. Key characteristics of Agile development include iterative and incremental progress, continuous feedback from customers, and the ability to adapt to changing requirements throughout the development process.

Agile development is about the speed of learning and problem-solving, not rigid frameworks or coaching. It emphasizes "speed to learning" — the rate at which you share insights. This flexibility allows for course adjustments, directing investments toward valuable aspects and avoiding overcommitment to assumptions. Agile offers the freedom to under-invest initially, minimizing the fear of errors. This philosophy isn't exclusive to Agile; effective communication in any development approach, like waterfall, prioritizes human interaction over frameworks. Humans first, frameworks second!

Agile development is a flexible and faster way to develop product. Agile development is like crafting a story; you write a bit, get feedback, make improvements, and repeat. It's a flexible and collaborative approach to building software.

Agile typically pushes for faster iteration and allows one to move faster in product development. Full blown product requirement documents may not exist. Short one pagers or direct instructions to engineers to get product built isn’t uncommon.

A clear design approach and a complete wireframe approval before product development aligns with a common challenge in Agile methodologies. Though Agile is known for its flexibility and adaptability, but frequent changes in stakeholder preferences can indeed pose challenges, potentially affecting the project timeline and deliverables.It highlights the need for effective communication, collaboration, and possibly adjustments in the Agile processes. I think the actual success is about preparing all stakeholders of the assumptions with iterations in an Agile methodology and its impact.

I like to use the a large container ship in the ocean and a jet ski as an analogy here. Waterfall is like turning a large container ship full of cargo. It will take a long time to adjust. If you have a problem, it is like the Titanic, it will hit the iceberg/be too late to pivot. Hardware uses this and it can work well but it is hard to adjust quickly. Hence, linear and rigid. Agile is like driving a jet ski in the ocean, you can stop and pivot and maneuver far faster. This is great for software product development. Iterative and flexible. All that said, I like waterfall for hardware for the details, and agile for software for the ability to stop and pivot.

Waterfall is like planning a big event (like a wedding) all at once. You decide everything upfront: the venue, the menu, the guest list, and the decorations. Once the plan is set, changing anything is hard and costly. Agile is more like organizing a weekly dinner party. You plan one dinner at a time, get feedback from your guests, and use that to make the next dinner better. It's flexible, and you can easily adjust things like the menu or the guest list each week based on what works best.

Waterfall v/s Agile: A cooking analogy Waterfall is like BAKING whereas Agile is like cooking in open vessel. While cooking in open vessel, you can keep on adjusting the recipe and taste on the go [AGILE]; Whereas in baking you setup a plan at the beginning and only get to see the finished product at the end [WATERFALL]

Waterfall is a more structured and sequential approach suitable for projects with well-defined and stable requirements, while Agile is an adaptive, iterative approach ideal for projects where requirements may evolve and where early delivery and continuous improvement are essential. Each has its strengths and is chosen based on project specifics and organizational preferences. My organization transitioned from a Waterfall to Agile methodology because it better suited our business needs and customer expectations.

While waterfall methodology follows sequential development, agile is incremental and iterative. In waterfall, feedback from stakeholders and users is gathered at the end of the project whereas in agile, feedback is taken regularly during the development cycle. In short, agile's flexible nature allows for continuous improvement and faster adaptation in case something doesn't work.

Short answer -it depends ?? Longer answer - If you know the requirements and they are clearly defined, and have a team of people who can deliver a task based approach, then waterfall is fine. If there is lots of complexity, risk, unknown information, and it is something that has not been done before, then an Agile, more product based approach may be better. Dependent on the type of project or product, one would then need to assess which Agile framework is more appropriate. Kanban is great for more operational, product maintenance or project focused work, and Scrum is better for product creation/innovation. Combine the two frameworks, and you have the best of both worlds. There is a longer answer, but will exceed the character limit! ????

Choosing between Agile and Waterfall depends on project requirements. Select Agile for flexibility, adaptability, and frequent client involvement. Choose Waterfall for projects with well-defined, stable requirements and a linear development path.

If you have a software development project in which the requirements evolve and there might be frequent changes, Agile Methodology will be best suited. Whereas in a project where the requirements are well defined from the start and aren’t expected to change, Waterfall Methodology will be best suited.

the business you are in, your content, and your projects/initiatives will influence whether you adopt agile or waterfall. some projects and sectors are better suited to big designs upfront before development, whilst others have more flexibility to iterate as you go.

Either methodology is designed to accomplish specific business GOALS. Use "Waterfall for control, Agile for exploration" Example - Working in regulatory/compliance projects, waterfall helps keep strict control on various phases. Alternatively, Agile is better suited for teams that plan on moving fast, experimenting with direction and don't know how the final project will look before they start

One can try to take best practices from each other, if it will work for you as per your sitution please continue following that. There is no harm to combine two mythodologies to get the benefit in your particular situation.

Not a good idea, it kills meaning of both. Having a clear plan for product development is crucial. Following a single methodology makes things clearer and more straightforward.

Some projects mixes between both, for example: Working as waterfall and start gathering requirements but with agile (which is gathering requirements as agile methodology). Then kicking-off the 2nd step. The mentioned example is too close to be waterfall. Making the chosen methodology is both will confuse stakeholders and team members. It's better to choose one according to the objectives and the estimated efforts needed for the project/product.

Combining Agile and Waterfall, often termed "Water-Scrum-Fall," aims to leverage the strengths of both methodologies. Initiate with a Waterfall approach for detailed planning and initial design, setting a solid foundation. Transition to Agile for iterative development, allowing flexibility and continuous improvement. This hybrid model accommodates structured planning and adaptability, ensuring a balance between predictability and responsiveness. It suits projects with defined phases yet requiring the agility to incorporate changes during development. Effective communication and a well-defined transition strategy are crucial for successful integration.

Mi trabajo en consultoria me permitio trabajar con framework de procesos de desarrollo sean del cliente (La Organizacion) o de la Consultora. Por lo general eran hibridos entre ambos metodos de desarrollo (agil y cascada) que se elegian segun los requerimientos del cliente y stakeholders, y casos de exito. La estrategia de servicios de la organizacion, sea in-house, outsourcing o mixta, era un factor determinante en la eleccion de cada framework, o metodo de cada etapa.

In my experience guiding software projects, many teams rigidly implement frameworks like SAFe without tuning processes to their unique needs. This over-engineering creates complexity that hinders, not helps. Rather than force-fitting formulas, I believe in crafting flexible approaches based on the specific humans, products, and organizations involved. Focus on fostering self-direction, rapid iteration, and customer collaboration vs mandating roles, rituals, and tickets. The best "process" energizes teams to solve problems and quickly deliver value! ?? Does this resonate with your experience?

Agile works in iterations, sprints and is centred around the principle of incremental progress and validation before building out the full solution. Waterfall instead follows a more rigid structure with pre-planned (delivery) dates/work and sequential phases. In waterfall, customer feedback is received at the end. In Agile, feedback is received at every iteration. That said, what is ultimately important is you build the right thing, for the right users in the right way.

Waterfall is a relatively older approach to software development process where you are supposed to go in a uni directional approach and there is limited scope of back tracking and reiteration during the span of development. Agile, on the other hand, is much more adaptive of changes and allows multiple iterations until the perfect features are built without any errors. Hence, Agile is more preferred in real world scenarios due to better cost optimization and end product delivery without quality being compromised.

Development teams often use agile workflows to defend against ineffective company processes. The two-week buffer before accepting new work allows them to push back. Regardless of the methodology used, successful company processes incorporate change as part of the overall plan.

Additionally, consider factors such as project complexity, timeline, team experience, and client involvement. Evaluate the level of flexibility needed and the ability to accommodate changes throughout the development process.