How do you decide when to use waterfall project management and when to use agile project management?

Waterfall project management is like a well-oiled machine for projects with a clear roadmap. It's perfect for those initiatives where you can predict the path ahead and don't expect many surprises. It's all about meticulous planning and execution, which can be incredibly satisfying when you see your project come together exactly as you envisioned. Just remember, it's not about being rigid, it's about being prepared. Keep that in mind, and you'll lead your team to success! ???? #ProjectManagement #Leadership #BusinessIntelligence

Got me by the cajones on this one. Project Management is a discipline of its own ilk. Waterfall generally is comprised of staged gates, thought by the uninitiated to be totally sequential. There can actually be concurrent activities. Agile is a set of values and principles that can be used independently or with a framework. I've been on initiatives where the Agile Manifesto was applied without Scrum or Waterfall. Teams did swarming. Hey! That's a concept. Create products by swarming, using rules that the team defines. Shameless plug: [email protected]

In today's dynamic project management landscape, the choice between waterfall and agile methodologies hinges on project specifics. While agile's iterative approach suits rapidly evolving projects, a shift towards the hybrid model is notable. Organizations increasingly recognize that a blend of waterfall's structured planning with agile's flexibility offers a pragmatic solution. This hybrid model accommodates diverse project elements, fostering adaptability without sacrificing overarching structure. The decision depends on project scope, complexity, and stakeholder expectations. A nuanced understanding of each methodology's strengths allows organizations to craft a tailored approach, ensuring optimal outcomes.

Deciding when to use waterfall or agile project management depends on the project. Waterfall is good when the requirements are clear from the start. Agile is better when the requirements might change.

You don't decide to do waterfall or agile! This is a very polarising way at looking at things and it aptly demonstrates the situation many organisations find themselves, having to consider how to create a Waterfall or Agile Program Offices for example! It represents a misunderstanding of the problems of complexity and uncertainty. The modern digital age has created new demands on how we create strategies to fund, prioritise and realise value for our modern products and services

Agile project management is a flexible and adaptive project delivery approach that comes in the form of a set of guidelines known as SCRUM or Kanban. I see it as an approach that helps apply common sense in complex worlds. Teams are kept small and are encouraged to collaborate frequently on what needs doing, continuously refining how they work well together. They might have access to customer feedback, helping them explore new ideas to better meet customer needs. Work is broken down into smaller chunks and delivered iteratively. Changing requirements are welcomed, and cross-dependencies are captured and coordinated early. There's more to this, but for now, this is what comes to mind.

Agile is by far the better way to execute projects in the dynamic world of project delivery today. Why? Because Agile allows you to incrementally develop and uncover issues a lot sooner than waiting until the end to find out that you got it wrong. Money down the drain and then trying to “fix” it far outweighs the cost and reputation of the Squad / Team. Iterative development, no matter what industry you’re in works best. By far!!

I don’t know the version of agile you use but I know that concise and straight to the point documentation are maintained in an agile product using tools. Meanwhile there is a lot of rework at the end of waterfall project since testing is not done in between the line until the end. You are confusing your readers.

Scope is fixed, budget is fixed and time is fixed. You have a clear backlog of work that's agreed upfront. Unknowns remain unknown until after a launch or, at the point of implementation or test.

Robust documentation available in waterfall model reduces the impact of human resources loss in Waterfall model. Since each stage in Waterfall model is well defined and well documented, it minimizes the impact of any change in project team at any point in time.

How is commitment and disciple a con and agile promotes the highest level of direct communication which is not even there in waterfall. Did you say scope creep is a risk in agile? That is one of the jobs of agile coaches and scrum masters mitigating against scope creep each sprint using burn down chart. There is a lot of misinformation in this submission.

In my experience, any loss of human resources in Agile model has a big impact on project. This stems from the lack of updated documentation in the project, as Agile is an iterative model and a lot changes during any given sprint.

This is not a binary choice. In reality many agile projects are really "waterfall lite" but have much more emphasis and acceptance of discovering value en route rather than claiming to know it all up front. Just look at DSDM and you will see some aspects of waterfall in it. Waterfall or agile is more about the governance and budget approvals rather than whether you have a daily meeting or not and "lessons being learned" is a far better practice than "lessons learnt" however you tackle complex work.

Agile approaches emerged because so-called waterfall methods were too slow to deliver in a world of rapid change, uncertainty and requirements volatility. In such an environment, rapid delivery, constant access to customers and frequent feedback loops are essential to success. But not all endeavours are so afflicted. When requirements are genuinely stable (scope is fixed), there is less need for agile approaches, which are challenging to adopt in some organisations. So, IF you have a choice of approaches, use waterfall if: - it is mandated by governance - requirements and scope are fixed and stable, - there is no need for frequent feedback loops. Having said that, there are almost always advantages to (aspects of) agile approaches.