The Misapplication of Agile and the Myth that Waterfall is Dead

The popularity of Agile project management has led some organizations to use it exclusively and declare other project management methodologies like Waterfall dead. This often leads to Agile being used in situations in which a different project management methodology would work much better, and this in turn results in poor project outcomes and disappointed end users.

Publication Date:  19 January 2024

Agile project management methodologies have become very popular in recent years, especially for software development projects. Agile project management has become so popular that it is tempting to think that other project management methodologies like Waterfall are dead. But nothing could be further from the truth. While Agile has advantages over Waterfall for certain types of projects, there are other situations in which Waterfall is a much better option.

Agile project management methodologies work well for projects in which more time is needed to fully define requirements and end users can truly benefit from early releases of a non-finished product. The iterative nature of Agile project management allows for significant overlap between requirements gathering, product design, and product development. This makes it possible for early versions of a product to be developed and released while requirements gathering and design work for the final version of the product are still in progress. In situations in which early versions of a product provide real benefits to end users, this is a great advantage of Agile project management.

But what about situations in which early versions of a product do not provide real benefits to end users? In these situations, Waterfall is often a much better option than Agile. While the iterative nature of Agile project management makes it possible to significantly overlap work on requirements gathering, product design, and product development, it also typically results in increased development rework as compared to Waterfall. In situations in which users can benefit from the early release of non-finished products, the cost of such development rework is often outweighed by decreasing the time users have to wait to start using a product. However, in situations where there is no real benefit to the release of early versions of a product, there is nothing to offset the cost of rework, and Waterfall becomes a much better option than Agile.

Unfortunately, the current popularity – and frankly hype – associated with Agile project management all too often results in organizational leaders pushing for its use in situations in which Waterfall would work much better. This often results in end users being forced to start using a non-finished product, often called a “minimally viable product,” that is worse than the product they are currently using. In the best of such circumstances, the use of the sub-par product is temporary and quickly remedied through future releases that are more fully developed. But in some instances, due to budget constraints, competing priorities, etc., product development slows or stops after the release of a minimally viable product and end users find themselves in a worse position than they were before they migrated to the new product.

Agile project management methodologies are very powerful toolsets and when applied to the right types of projects they can dramatically decrease the amount of time it takes to get a product into the hands of end users. However, just like is the case with many other types of powerful toolsets, the misapplication of Agile project management can cause harm. There is still a place for Waterfall in project management, and denying this and trying to use Agile for everything will result in poor project outcomes and harm to end users.