Agile vs Waterfall approach, the definitions, differences and comparation between these two approaches.

Pragmatic and Dogmatic. 

Pragmatic and dogmatic are two contrasting approaches or mindsets that can be applied to various aspects of life, including belief systems, problem-solving, decision-making, and strategies to work. Here's a comparison between pragmatic and dogmatic: 

Pragmatic 

Pragmatism is a practical and flexible approach that emphasizes using practical, logical, and adaptable methods to solve problems or achieve desired outcomes. Here are some characteristics of pragmatism: 

  1. Open-mindedness: Pragmatic individuals are open to new ideas, perspectives, and evidence. They are willing to consider different viewpoints and adapt their beliefs and actions based on the situation. 
  2. Flexibility: Pragmatic people are willing to adjust their methods, strategies, or approaches if they find a more effective or efficient way to achieve their goals. 
  3. Problem-solving orientation: Pragmatic individuals focus on finding practical solutions to problems. They value practicality, feasibility, and real-world effectiveness over theoretical or abstract considerations. 
  4. Emphasis on outcomes: Pragmatic individuals prioritize the result and what works best to achieve their goals. They are willing to experiment, learn from failures, and make necessary adjustments. 
  5. Pragmatic skepticism: Pragmatic individuals question and critically evaluate ideas, theories, and practices, seeking evidence and practical justification. 

Dogmatic 

Dogmatism is rigid and inflexible adherence to beliefs, principles, or rules without questioning or considering alternative viewpoints. Here are some characteristics of dogmatism: 

  1. Rigidity: Dogmatic individuals adhere strictly to a particular set of beliefs, principles, or rules and resist change or alternative perspectives. 
  2. Closed-mindedness: Dogmatic individuals are often unwilling to consider or accept ideas, evidence, or viewpoints that challenge or contradict their established beliefs. 
  3. Rule-following orientation: Dogmatic individuals prioritize adhering to established rules, traditions, or authorities, often without questioning their validity or effectiveness. 
  4. Absolutism: Dogmatic individuals view their beliefs as absolute truths and may be less willing to think critically or consider alternative possibilities. 
  5. Resistance to change: Dogmatic individuals often resist changing their beliefs, even when confronted with evidence or circumstances suggesting the need for adaptation. 

It is important to note that pragmatism and dogmatism exist on a spectrum, and individuals may exhibit varying degrees of pragmatism and dogmatism in different areas of life or depending on the context. A balanced approach that combines open-mindedness, critical thinking, and a willingness to adapt based on evidence and practicality is often considered advantageous in most situations. 

A Story 

In one of my past careers, I defined the ideal process flow and process documents for an OEM automotive electrical, electronic, and embedded department. I worked with the various departments on how they performed their work and what was expected from the upstream team and downstream. In the end, there was a maximum model Gantt chart of over 500 activities. We then wrote specific process documents based upon these expected inputs, a description of the ideal processes, and anticipated output and outcome. However, even before describing the process inputs, we had the first heading titled objective. In this way, the team members in a specific project would know the objective of any work item and decide 1) does this apply to this project and 2) whether there are other ways than the formally articulated approach for those times when the ideal inputs or process are not available. Anything we can do to remove the check the brains at the door or distilling the work processes and instructions down to a check-the-box mentality is helpful. This was our approach to reducing these risks. We will write more about this in the future. 

Comparison Agile, Stage-Gate, and Waterfall 

Agile, Stage-Gate, and Waterfall are project management and development methodologies that differ in their approach to planning, execution, and flexibility. Here's a comparison of these three methodologies: 

Waterfall Methodology: 

We should note that we have never experienced a waterfall as often portrayed – all of this before the next step. 

  1. Sequential and linear approach: Waterfall follows a sequential flow, with each phase (requirements, design, development, testing, deployment) completed one after another. 
  2. Fixed requirements: It assumes that the requirements can be defined upfront and remain relatively stable throughout the project. 
  3. Minimal customer involvement: Waterfall typically involves limited customer collaboration during the development process, with customer feedback often incorporated towards the end of the project. 
  4. Emphasizes documentation: Waterfall strongly emphasizes documentation, with comprehensive requirements and design documentation produced before development starts. 
  5. Less adaptable to changes: Changes in requirements or scope can be challenging to accommodate once a phase is completed, potentially leading to delays or increased costs. 

Agile Methodology: 

  1. Iterative and incremental approach: Agile breaks the project into small, manageable iterations (sprints), where each iteration results in a working product increment. 
  2. Adaptive to change: Agile embraces changing requirements and encourages flexibility. It accommodates frequent customer collaboration, allowing for feedback and adjustments throughout the project. 
  3. Self-organizing teams: Agile promotes self-organizing cross-functional teams collaborating closely on the project, fostering flexibility, creativity, and ownership. 
  4. Continuous delivery: Agile focuses on delivering working software or product increments at regular intervals, enabling early and frequent customer feedback. 
  5. Less emphasis on documentation: While Agile values documentation, it prioritizes working software over extensive documentation. 

Stage Gate Methodology: 

  1. Sequential with decision gates: Stage Gate follows a sequential flow like Waterfall but includes decision points (gates) where a project's progress is assessed before proceeding to the next stage. 
  2. Evaluation and approval at gates: Each gate reviews the project's deliverables, business case, risks, and benefits to determine if it should proceed to the next stage. 
  3. Emphasizes planning and control: Stage Gate emphasizes upfront planning, detailed documentation, and rigorous evaluation at each gate to ensure alignment with project goals. 
  4. More adaptable than Waterfall: While Stage-Gate has more flexibility than Waterfall, changes can still be challenging to accommodate between gates due to the structured nature of the methodology. 

In summary, Agile is known for its adaptability and iterative nature, accommodating changing requirements and customer feedback throughout the project. Conversely, Waterfall is more structured and suitable for projects with well-defined requirements and few changes. Stage-Gate provides a structured approach with evaluation points but allows for more adaptability than Waterfall. The choice of methodology depends on project characteristics, customer involvement, flexibility requirements, and organizational preferences. 

Attributes of Agile, Stage-Gate, and Waterfall 

In general, we believe the best approach will be circumstance and situation depending.  To determine the best method for our specific effort, it is good to understand the comparative practices, so here's a comparison and contrast between Agile, Stage-Gate, and Waterfall project management techniques: 

Agile: 

  1. Approach: Agile follows an iterative and incremental approach, focusing on adaptability and flexibility. 
  2. Flexibility: Agile embraces changes throughout the project and allows frequent adjustments based on customer feedback and evolving requirements. 
  3. Iterations: Agile divides the project into time-boxed iterations called sprints, delivering working increments of the product at the end of each iteration. 
  4. Customer Collaboration: Agile emphasizes close collaboration with customers and stakeholders throughout the project to ensure the final product meets their needs. 
  5. Communication: Agile promoted open and frequent communication within the team, fostering transparency and shared understanding. 
  6. Planning: Agile uses adaptive planning, with detailed planning for the current iteration and high-level planning for future iterations. 

Stage-Gate: 

  1. Phased Approach: Stage Gate divides the project into distinct stages or gates, with clear objectives and deliverables for each step. 
  2. Decision Points: At each gate, stakeholders evaluate project progress and make informed decisions on whether to proceed, modify, or halt the project. 
  3. Risk Management: Stage Gate emphasizes risk management and identifying potential issues or challenges at each gate, allowing for timely mitigation. 
  4. Stakeholder Involvement: Stage Gate encourages the active involvement of stakeholders at each gate to provide feedback, review progress, and make informed decisions. 
  5. Documentation: Stage Gate typically requires documentation of objectives, deliverables, and criteria for advancing to the next stage. 
  6. Phased Planning: Stage Gate involves detailed planning for each stage before the project proceeds to the subsequent step. 

Waterfall: 

  1. Sequential Process: Waterfall follows a linear and sequential flow, with distinct phases such as requirements gathering, design, development, testing, and deployment. 
  2. Clear Phases and Milestones: Each phase in Waterfall has well-defined objectives, deliverables, and milestones that must be completed before moving to the next step. 
  3. Documentation: Waterfall places a strong emphasis on comprehensive upfront documentation, including requirements documents, design specifications, and project plans. 
  4. Predictability: Waterfall provides predictability regarding project timelines, costs, and deliverables since the entire project is planned upfront. 
  5. Limited Flexibility: Waterfall has limited flexibility for changes once a phase is completed, as going back to a previous step can be complex and time-consuming. 
  6. Stakeholder Involvement: Waterfall may have limited stakeholder involvement between phases, with more formal reviews at specific milestones. 

Contrasts: 

  • Agile and Stage Gate share some similarities, such as iterative approaches and customer collaboration. However, Agile focuses more on adaptability and continuous feedback, while Stage Gate emphasizes decision points and risk management at each gate. 
  • Waterfall is a sequential methodology, whereas Agile and Stage Gate allow for iterations and flexibility. 
  • Agile promotes open communication and collaboration throughout the project, while Waterfall may have more formal and limited stakeholder involvement. 
  • Agile plans in smaller increments, Stage Gate involves detailed planning at each gate, and Waterfall requires comprehensive upfront planning. 

Each methodology has its strengths and weaknesses, and the choice depends on project complexity, customer involvement, adaptability requirements, and organizational preferences. Some organizations may even adopt hybrid approaches, combining elements from multiple methodologies to suit their needs. 

Pros and Cons! 

Agile Methodology: Pros: 

  1. Flexibility and adaptability: Agile allows for changes in requirements, priorities, and scope throughout the project, making it suitable for dynamic environments. 
  2. Customer collaboration: Frequent customer involvement and feedback help ensure the delivered product meets customer expectations. 
  3. Faster time to market: The iterative approach of Agile enables the delivery of working software or product increments at regular intervals, allowing for earlier market releases. 
  4. Continuous improvement: Agile encourages reflection, learning, and continuous improvement through retrospectives, promoting team growth and efficiency. 
  5. Higher customer satisfaction: Agile's focus on customer collaboration and delivering value incrementally enhances customer satisfaction. 

Agile Methodology: Cons: 

  1. Potential for scope creep: Without proper controls, the flexibility in Agile can lead to scope creep, where the project expands beyond its initial boundaries. 
  2. Limited predictability: Agile projects may have less predictable timelines and costs due to the iterative nature and potential changes in requirements. 
  3. Heavy reliance on team collaboration: Agile requires strong collaboration, which can be challenging in large or geographically distributed teams. 
  4. Documentation may be limited: Agile prioritizes working software over extensive documentation, which can challenge regulatory or compliance-driven projects. 
  5. Suitable for specific project types: Agile is better suited for projects with evolving requirements and where continuous feedback and adaptation are necessary. 

Waterfall Methodology: Pros: 

  1. Clear and sequential process: Waterfall provides a structured and easy-to-understand process, where each phase follows a linear flow. 
  2. Well-defined requirements: Waterfall assumes stable and well-defined requirements upfront, allowing for a clear project plan. 
  3. Document-centric approach: Waterfall places emphasis on comprehensive documentation, which can aid in project understanding, maintenance, and future reference. 
  4. Easy to manage and track progress: The linear nature of Waterfall makes it easier to track progress and allocate resources across different project phases. 
  5. Suitable for projects with stable requirements: Waterfall is effective for projects where requirements are unlikely to change significantly. 

Waterfall Methodology: Cons: 

  1. Limited adaptability to changes: Waterfall's sequential approach makes it challenging to incorporate changes once a phase is completed, potentially leading to rework or delays. 
  2. Minimal customer involvement: Waterfall involves limited customer collaboration during development, potentially resulting in a product that does not fully meet customer expectations. 
  3. Higher risk of project failure: If requirements are not accurately defined upfront or there is a lack of proper risk assessment, Waterfall projects are more susceptible to failure. 
  4. Late delivery of tangible results: Working software or product deliverables are typically only available towards the end of the project, delaying potential market releases or customer feedback. 
  5. Limited opportunities for course correction: Without regular customer feedback and adaptation, it may be challenging to course correct if issues or gaps arise during the development process. 

Stage Gate Methodology: Pros: 

  1. Structured decision-making: Stage Gate provides decision gates that enable project evaluation and approval, ensuring alignment with project goals at each stage. 
  2. Risk management: The structured evaluation process helps identify risks and issues early, allowing for timely mitigation or course correction. 
  3. Clear project milestones: Stage Gate provides clear milestones and deliverables, aiding in project planning, tracking, and resource allocation. 
  4. Balancing flexibility and control: Stage Gate balances flexibility (compared to Waterfall) and control (compared to Agile), making it suitable for projects with medium to high complexity. 
  5. Effective resource utilization: Stage Gate helps ensure resources are allocated to projects demonstrating their value and potential for success. 

Stage Gate Methodology: Cons: 

  1. Limited adaptability to changes between gates: Changes in requirements or scope may be challenging to accommodate between decision gates, potentially leading to delays. 

There is no single Solution. 

Here are descriptions of project and organizational situations where Agile, Waterfall, and Stage-Gate project management approaches may be the most suitable: 

Agile: 

  1. Project Situation: Agile is well-suited for projects with evolving or uncertain requirements, where there is a need for continuous adaptation and frequent customer feedback. It is ideal for projects where innovation, collaboration, and flexibility are critical. 
  2. Organizational Situation: Agile benefits organizations that value a dynamic and iterative approach to project management. It suits organizations prioritizing customer satisfaction, rapid delivery, and continuous improvement. It is commonly used in software development, technology, and creative industries. 

Waterfall: 

  1. Project Situation: Waterfall is best suited for projects with well-defined and stable requirements, with minimal risk of significant changes or scope creep during the project. It is ideal for projects with a linear and sequential flow, emphasizing thorough planning and documentation upfront. 
  2. Organizational Situation: Waterfall is often used in organizations with a traditional and structured approach to project management. It suits organizations with clear hierarchies and well-defined processes, where predictability and strict adherence to timelines and budgets are crucial. Industries such as construction and manufacturing often find Waterfall useful. 

Stage-Gate: 

  1. Project Situation: Stage-Gate is suitable for projects that require rigorous evaluation and decision-making at various stages. It works well when the project can be divided into distinct phases or gates, allowing stakeholders to assess progress, manage risks, and make informed decisions before proceeding. 
  2. Organizational Situation: Stage-Gate is helpful for organizations that value systematic and structured project management, where risk management and thorough evaluation are essential. It is commonly adopted in industries with compliance requirements, regulatory approvals, or projects with significant financial implications. Initiatives such as pharmaceuticals and aerospace often use Stage Gate. 

It's important to note that these are general guidelines, and the suitability of each approach may vary based on the specific project, industry, and organizational context. Hybrid systems that combine elements of different methodologies are also standard, allowing organizations to tailor their project management approach to best meet their unique needs. 

The World is Diverse. 

Our approach should be commensurate with the project objectives, risks, opportunities, and constraints to which the project is confronted. We do the organization a disservice when we decide there is only one way to accomplish the work. In our experience, we have found that a mash of approaches is the best solution; for example, we have used agile processes at the detail working level within the stage gate approved automotive OEM approach to the work. In addition to employing these merged project management styles, we have had many discussions and have ruminated on was to mash these with Rick Edwards, a long-time friend, and colleague. In fits and starts, we have compiled book material called Stretch.