Hybrid Agile - A Bridge Between Past And Future ?

Here It comes Fellas. A new thing, which may become talk of the town soon. Let me Introduce you to a new methodology which is going to get oldies and youngsters of Project management together. Old ones are Predictive and New ones are Adaptive.

We all know (most of us PMs), predictive planning breaks down when we look at whirlpool of requirements from not so sure clients. PMs generally gauge that specifications being talked about are certainly going to change over a period of time, looking at the amount of work needed.

There is almost certain chances that if projects follow waterfall methods, they will end up coming with end product which looks somewhat like initial discussions and product specs. However, it may really have lost on time, money and required changes which could have been done on time. To move a predictive model is for quick changes is next to impossible.

Its very clear that its a sequential model where all the pieces fit together in a sequence. Change one thing and the whole thing collapses. Hence, to make sure the serial nature of processes remain intact, a change management board is set up. Which obviously looks for pros and cons of changes, timing of those changes, critical path and what not? It involves a lot of debate and contractual jargon which is discredited by client and vendor with same ferocity.

Agile being an adaptive methodology, makes sure that these changes do not take a long time to be approved and thought over within so many agencies. It rather tries to ''Accommodate'' the new changes and demands to keep things moving. Movement seem to be mindset of Agile, which I fully endorse. If a project is not moving it certainly is going back and going to cost time and energy both.

Some orgs are finding that movement towards Agile is causing a lot of issues in terms of changing the old guard with the new. The old mindset with the new one. Due to this sudden rush to follow the trends, the essence of both is being forgotten. One is good old planned, take no risk and keep and umbrella for the rains approach. Another one is fast paced, complexity friendly and rapid shooting delivery engine.

Both have their pros and cons. However when you leave one completely and jump on to the new one, there are risks in that too. These are not mere tools, that PMs and Developers and testers will be trained to work on in a month or two. Both are fairly thought out and well structured methodologies, which may take a long time to seep into the overall system.

One cannot deny and witness the mixture of both world being used with different names everywhere. Its been going on since a long time now. Till 2010-2011 all my Naval projects were purely run on project plans, requirements documentation and sign-offs, WBS timelines were monitored closely to make sure we are not delayed. Every delay used to be noted to calculate overall impact on the final closures. However since then, agile has made sure that projects are more like boxed work, keep on doing it week on week and its all sorted.

If wish that was the case. Various issues crop up from time to time. Some of them are related to teams skipping the tasks or missing deadline due to issues like scope creep and not able to see end of the tunnel before project began. Unclear vision makes not-so-good product. Lack of Documentation gives a chance of conflict to the client which makes things worse. Week on week blunders can make teams demotivated to produce results as you are always catching up.

Checks and Balances makes sure that process can find ground when challenged. However in Agile scenarios a proper planning and design phase never takes place like in case of waterfall methods, without design approval and risk evaluations things don't proceed further. A forward look at future of product and associated challenges can make sure teams a well prepared for upcoming tasks. This issue generally ends up making project swell in time, cost and manpower.

I know things can be solved within Agile itself by using Blended approach like SAFe does. That also comes at a cost. Steep learning curve and too many agencies to monitor work make it way more tedious for organizations to move. This makes it as heavy as a waterfall model if not more.

The Hybrid Model, seems to be a good combination of Planned, Designed and Risk aware model with fast paced delivery and adaptive to change model. By now the reader must have understood that Hybrid model brings the Design and Planning into the foray of incremental and change friendly Agile methods. This may make Agile a bit confusing but will make sure that rather than a long jump Organizations may find it better to take smaller hops to reach a full agile mode.

There are problems in this Hybrid style too, like organizations getting too comfortable in Hybrid model and not willing to go further for a better phase ahead. Hybrid model can also give personnel to take shelter into confusion cause due to conflicting methodologies as well. It can also cause both these systems to loose their charm for what they stand since long times. It also may create a divide within PMO about who will follow what.

But, this can give a certain way for organizations to make a transition. All the organizations do not support sudden changes in working style. They may have their reasons and the reasons could be justified or not. But, its difficult for sure.

Hybrid models can provide a sense of hold or support while trying for conversions into Agile way of management. This model will certainly give lot more chance for the organizations to test the waters as compared to going full throttle Agile mode.

We have seen many changes in the past, we will definitely see changes in the future, stagnation is not good for any methodology anyways. What happened to Waterfall may happen to Agile as well. Hybrid model may work or may not work but it will certainly be a learning to us all. Hybrid Model could be a great bridge between Past and Future.

Thanks