Agile or Waterfall_a thought when they can unite and when not

Text-only Preview

Two things:

1: When only managing a project it is true, that there is no way of telling if agile or waterfall is better
than the other. You have to evaluate the teams' personalities, the stakeholders, the project itself and
decide what framework or hybrid suits best and follow it. The reason for this interconnectivity is
simple. Agile is nothing new, it is "merely" a concept that when followed through an organization has
far reaching consequences. For example: Edwards Deming's QA principles are straight included in the
agile manifesto (most probably unintentionally, but the coincidence is inevitable) and that is
something coming from 60 years ago.
So when one merely manages a project and does not look at the broader prospect agile is just
another tool kit. Tool kits can be mixed. You only have to take care to pick the right tool for every


2: When considering high added value projects, where innovativeness is key, agile is the right
answer. In this case you have to follow agile through the whole organization. Agile helps creating a
highly effective, innovative and high performing environment, shortens the learning curve, allows
fast reaction to the market (with the fast product releases) and creates very high quality products. In
this case agile is not a toolkit. It is a whole new way of managing the business (not the project) from
the cleaner to the CEO. Waterfall is incapable of doing this as it is simply made for something else:
control whilst agile is made for: creation.
My guess is that while agile cannot exist in a waterfall environment in organizational level, waterfall
can find its place in an agile organization.