Agile vs Waterfall – Pros, Cons, Best Suited for [#AgileVsWaterfall #AgilePros #AgileCons #AgileBestSuitedFor]

Agile vs Waterfall – Pros, Cons, Best Suited for [#AgileVsWaterfall #AgilePros #AgileCons #AgileBestSuitedFor]

 

AgileWaterfall
Pros
  • Development is rapid yet flexible.
  • Due to the short iterative sprints and a focus on quality, teams are able to identify and fix defects much faster than waterfall.
  • Various small teams can be assigned different tasks that may not hold up different aspects or phases of development.
  • Iterations allow for rapid product changes to be made during development, as needed.
  • Although the cycles are more formal and sequential, the lengthy and ordered processes are easy for small and large teams to navigate.
  • Set development cycles can provide more stability for new teams starting out.
  • Project requirements are established at the start, making project execution less complex and with fewer moving targets.
  • The full project is budgeted and resourced from the start making expectations and risks easier to manage.
Cons
  • Agile requires a Scrum master who is experienced with sprints and who is not easily flustered due to the fast nature of iterations.
  • Customers may tend to get frustrated with many requests to review changes.
  • If teams are not well-organized or self-governing, agile may present issues for remote teams located in different parts of the world in varying time zones.
  • Development is slower and less flexible due to its sequential nature and is dependent on the completion of the previous phases.
  • Issues are usually only discovered later in the testing phase.
  • Requirements are determined and approved at the start of the project. Scope changes are less likely to be an option.
Best suited for
  • High-performing software development teams, especially in the software development niche.
  • Organizations focused on high-quality deliverables and continuous improvement, especially if quality aligns with their value proposition or competitive differentiator.
  • Large and complex companies such as IBM, Cisco, AT&T, and Microsoft streamline their processes and respond to changes faster using agile.
  • Project teams that regularly work closely with their customers and other external parties.
  • Teams that need quick feedback about deliverables rather than waiting until a project is fully complete.
  • Teams that need a more predictable and sequential project timeline and have a fixed budget.
  • Less experienced project teams.
  • Companies with a lower tolerance for change or risk.
  • Companies whose customers are limited by time and resources and cannot collaborate frequently.
  • Simple projects with simple requirements.
  • Projects that have the luxury of longer timelines.
Adapted from:

Agile vs. waterfall: Project methodologies compared

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Don`t copy text!