What are the key differences between the Stage-Gate model and the Agile model?

Stage-gate is a must for new product development, at least in medical devices. For long-term stategic execution. However, individual stages may be executed in an agile way. Agile overall is a better method for life-cycle engineering and continuous improvement while creating and prioritizing clear work packages. Both methodologies may be used concurrently, and may not contradict each other.

The Stage-Gate model offers a structured, linear approach to product development, focusing on reducing risk and ensuring quality through well-defined stages and decision points. However, it contrasts with Agile methodologies, which are iterative and more adaptable to change. While Stage-Gate relies on formal gates for decision-making, Agile employs continuous feedback loops and empowers cross-functional teams to make quicker decisions. The choice between the two often depends on project complexity, speed-to-market needs, and the level of adaptability required.

The SG methodology is a New Product Development model. It is extremely powerful when it is well supported from the top, and the organization enables the teams to tailor it based on the specific conditions. It is sequential at the Stage level, but it is also very iterative during the concept and design development stages. The Gates (leadership approval meetings), however, induce "waste" when some functional areas are left idle while waiting for approval to move forward to the next set of deliverables. The cost of such "waste" is justified by the beneficial progressive reduction of costly uncertainty.

In my line of work, electrical hardware systems, the Stage-Gate model is a tried and true method. It is really the best way to track progress, development and cost.

In my experience, the Stage Gate model offers an effective framework for making decisions regarding product continuity. It allows you to initiate with a streamlined team and then scale it up, or alternatively, halt the project, thus ensuring the survival of the most viable option.

Agile is a Project Management methodology. It is definitely the way to go when developing software! This project management approach took care of one of the most difficult parts of the development projects, the articulation of requirements, its flexibility provides an individual (accountable) within the team who communicates product expectations via stories and then quickly approves deliverables at the end of the sprint. This eliminate the extremely wasteful documentation of requirements, which are not only tough to articulate but that can be quickly demonstrated by the proposal at the end of the sprint. It is easier and more effective to rework small deliverables than writing difficult to translate requirements when handling data.

The use of methods depends on the existing team. Some teams do not have the spirit of working in the agile method and it is better to advance the stage gate method. Personally, I feel more comfortable with Ajail

In my experience, Agile is particularly effective for developing thoroughly researched products that are prepared to commence, especially when anticipating challenges and uncertainties. Ensuring incremental progress in every sprint, regardless of its scale, is vital. Reflecting on achievements or setbacks at each sprint helps maintain awareness among team members. While this approach encourages transparency, it's important to consider that an increased number of meetings might result in longer overall development times.

Agile isn’t a model. It’s a way of thinking about developing and delivering software. Using sprints (as per Scrum) is a common way of working, but not needed to be agile. Another way would be a continuous process of developing and releasing software, often called kanban. If you really want to know what agile is, read the manifesto at agilemanifesto.org and reflect on what you’re doing is in line with what is written there. Other inspiration might come from Lean, Theory of Constraints, understanding Little’s Law and Kingman’s formula, QRM, and many more… What you should be wary of is anyone claiming their system/framework fits any context, or confuses agility with project management, which it most definitely is not. /rant

Agile is the way to go as: - Getting experimental /user feedback is the only verdict to rely on - Plans change based on progress / failure - There is only so much we can foresee

Stage-Gate and Agile share some similarities, but they are different. Stage-Gate is purpose-built as an over-arching governance model (what to do and when to do it) to commercialize innovation, whereas Agile is purpose-built for software development (how to do it). Comparing them is like comparing apples to oranges. Agile favors “team expertise” to drive a project whereas Stage-Gate begins with a proven model (the algorithm), much like starting with a recipe or a formula, and experimenting from there. Most top-performing organizations use Stage-Gate and Agile, together. Companies like Amazon, Apple, Corning, Danfoss, GE, Johnson & Johnson, and others, have successfully integrated Stage-Gate and Agile into their own ‘hybrid’.

Stage-gate and agile can be thought of in terms of navigating through a city to your destination. In stage-gate, the course is mapped ahead of time and landmarks are selected as points to evaluate how the trip is going and if any changes should be made. Between those landmarks, the driver may not deviate from the defined path. Stage gate excels when the course is familiar. In agile, there is a higher frequency of feedback. Every time an intersection is reached, the team makes a decision about which way to go. Agile excels when the course is unknown.

Not the same. If Waterfall vs Agile are compared for Stage-Gate, the key is the nature of the product in development vs the risks. Are you developing a physical product that requires materials, or are you working with data(software)? If the time and costs to fine tune(rework) the product in development are minimal, then the Agile methodology should be the way to go(fail fast!). If instead, you are engineering material and your user validation is very involved, then the Waterfall methodology fits you well. However, I have found opportunities in the initial stages of the SG model to use Hybrid approaches. The desire to reduce time-to-market + the literal meaning of the word "agile" bring pressure into the NPD when rightfully using Waterfall

???? Das Stage-Gate-Modell ist ein sequentielles, phasenbasiertes Prozessmodell, das Produktentwicklung in klar definierten Schritten organisiert. Es erfordert detaillierte Planung und Bewertungen an bestimmten Punkten ("Gates"). ???? Im Gegensatz dazu ist das Agile-Modell iterativ und flexibler. Es betont Zusammenarbeit, Anpassungsf?higkeit und h?ufige Lieferungen von kleinen, inkrementellen Verbesserungen. ??Der Hauptunterschied liegt in der Struktur: Stage-Gate ist stufenweise und festgelegt, w?hrend Agile auf Flexibilit?t und kontinuierlicher Anpassung basiert.???

Although agile is better for start-ups, large organizations can advance projects with agile when it comes to new products. It depends on their courage

we were tasked with developing "SwiftComm," a communication app for remote teams. Given its software nature, we initially leaned into the Agile model for its adaptability and swift iterations. However, as the app's infrastructure grew, we realized the need for more structured quality checks to ensure seamless integration of various features. So, we introduced elements of the Stage-Gate model for milestone evaluations. The hybrid approach was a game-changer. Agile's flexibility paired with Stage-Gate's structure enabled us to roll out "SwiftComm" ahead of schedule, with rave beta tester reviews. The experience highlighted the value of marrying structured planning with adaptive execution in product development.

In my 30-year career in innovation management, I have observed that the most successful companies are ambidextrous - they deliberately seek to balance a number of seemingly contradictory practices (planning vs. spontaneity, research vs. experimentation, sprinting vs. careful deliberation, and so on). I call this the yin and yang of innovation. This is why top performers integrate Stage-Gate and Agile, for their complementary differences. Stage-Gate: speed to profit, accountability, visibility to the pipeline, governance that engages business leaders, resource allocations, prioritization, focus, discipline, retention of learnings into the process to build org capability. Agile: speed to solution, ‘project-level context’, flexibility.

I believe this article might be using the Stage-Gate model as an interchangeable term with Waterfall Project Management methodology, two different things. Does anyone disagree? One is a New Product Development model (Stage-Gate) and the other one is a Project Management methodology (Agile). Waterfall vs Agile would be a more suitable comparison. The Stage-Gate model could use either Agile, Waterfall, or a Hybrid project management methodologies to develop new products.

As others have pointed out, SG and Agile are not directly comparable. SG is about product development decisions, whereas Agile has more impact on work organization. In my experience, SG seems to easily get a bad reputation because it seems to lend itself to rigid, pro forma and non-valuable-add behaviors and structures. But this is due to implementation, not the basic concepts. In my experience in R&D project management, I find that a serious commitment to SG (and commitment is a big challenge), can be very helpful in ensuring the best possible discussions, and both initial and ongoing decisions, on project objectives. Many projects fail due to weaknesses in these areas, so any approach that can help with this is valuable

When you are changing the platform that users are using, the only way is stage-gate. Because everything must be under control and you have acquired enough information

I think “simple” is always the right answer. If you are an organization that takes on fewer than a handful of projects each year and you put your most seasoned players on them, you can get away with Agile alone. Or any robust project management methodology. Think Startups, especially software based Startups. However, if your business relies on several projects (a portfolio) to realize its strategic goals, especially top-line revenue, you will benefit by adopting the Stage-Gate governance process. Stage-Gate will engage business leaders at the right decision points to ensure the best projects are surfacing, poor projects are killed and resources are allocated to the projects with the most potential to advance the strategy.

Again, the Stage-Gate development model and the Agile project management methodology are not mutually exclusive. If what we wanted to compare is Waterfall vs Agile project management methodologies within the Stage-Gate model for the development of new products, this would be my rule of thumb: - Developing data > Agile(fail fast) - Developing materials > Waterfall(high risk of rework). Still, be in lookout for opportunities to hybrid. The Stage-Gate model can use either of these two methodologies or a hybrid. Maximizing the opportunities depend in big part on the NPD maturity level of the organization, team capabilities, and the flexibility of Team-Management agreements.

If you are working on a simple/smaller project, then you can get away with using one of the other (dependent on the type of project). Over time I have found combing the two works well. I use Stage-Gate to fix milestones and build out a roadmap and Agile as a way of managing the tasks to reach the milestones.

Definitely, in the case of start-ups, it should be done quickly. Agile reduces analysis processes and reduces time to market. Agility in startups can strengthen courage in the team, and Stage-Gate can lead to the flagging of logic.

From my experience, product development can be quite intricate; even endeavors backed by brilliant minds have at times struggled to make a significant impact and ended up being abandoned. It's worth noting that there's no universally right or wrong way to approach it—your choice should align with what best suits your specific context. In my view, commencing with the Stage Gate model to kickstart the product holds merit, and later embracing the flexibility of the Agile methodology once the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) is prepared could prove advantageous. This transition allows for a more adaptive and iterative approach, capitalizing on the strengths of both methodologies at different phases of the development process.

Product Innovation is less mysterious for all involved when you acknowledge that it simply means ‘new’. It means creating solutions that are ‘new’ to your own organization or new to your customers, or both. Therefore, developing an organizational capability to innovate really means you are developing an organizational capability to learn new stuff (new technologies, new markets/needs, etc.), and apply it so you can create value for your customers and your business. The company that can learn and create value the fastest, wins. This is why Stage-Gate is embraced by so many business leaders - it guides each project to success but it also incorporates each projects’ learnings back into the process so others benefit.

The stage gate model is a structure based mainly on past experiences. It allows large organisations often spread worldwide to manage complex projects. On the other hand the agile model needs people to lead, commit and finally take responsibility. A rare species, especially in large organisations.

Understanding agility starts with reading the manifesto for agile software development. The assumption prevalent at the time of writing was that change later in development made things more expensive. This makes sense in the engineering fields where this idea came from, when you’re building a bridge for instance. The manifesto challenges this assumption for software development. If the time between “let’s make this” until “in customer hands” is measured in months you should’t claim you’re agile. How problematic that is depends on your context. If you’re interested in leveling up your agility but you don’t know where to start, you might want to check out Michael Lloyd’s Dysfunctionmapping. PS: Don’t take my word for any of this.