Agile vs the Universe: The Challenge of Physical Product Development

In the world of product development, you've likely heard about the agile methodology, the darling of the software industry. With its focus on flexibility, iteration, and customer feedback, it’s been heralded as the end-all and be-all of efficient product development. But does it really fit all contexts? Specifically, can it work its magic in complex physical product development? I’m going to throw a curveball here and say, perhaps not. And the reason centers around one term: adversarial relationships.?

Throughout history, we've found that the most effective way to navigate adversarial relationships is through the implementation of rules and laws. Consider traffic laws, for instance. They effectively regulate the potentially conflicting interests of drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians, creating a harmonious flow. These laws need to be airtight and consistently enforced to ensure safety and order.

In the realm of physical product development, the most potent laws we encounter are the laws of physics. They're the most stringent and efficiently applied rules in existence. You can't negotiate with gravity or argue with the speed of light. When you’re designing a car or a rocket, you must abide by these laws, or, well, things can literally explode in your face.

On top of these scientific laws, physical products often have to adhere to a myriad of regulations and standards. Whether you're building medical devices, cars, or kitchen appliances, there are safety standards, environmental regulations, and industry-specific rules that must be followed.

This is where Agile, which relies on shared intent and filling in the blanks, can start to struggle. In software development, where the 'physics' are essentially created by the programmers themselves, Agile can thrive. But when the rules are externally imposed and non-negotiable, the flexibility of Agile can become a liability.?

In these cases, the Waterfall methodology, often seen as the lumbering dinosaur of project management, might actually prove to be a more suitable approach. It's sequential and rule-oriented, allowing for careful planning and risk management. It lets you create those airtight contracts with the universe that ensure your physical products function as they should, without any unexpected "surprises".

So, while Agile might be the talk of the town, don't discount the trusty old Waterfall, especially when you're dealing with the hard truths of physical product development. It might not be as dynamic or flexible as Agile, but when you're trying to convince the universe to play by your rules, it's got your back.

About me

Co-founder of Trace.Space – AI-enhanced Requirements Management. I write about #systemsengineering and complex product development.