The Pros and Cons of Agile and Waterfall Approaches
Agile vs Waterfall: Key Differences and When to Use Each Method
One of the challenges of Agile is that it can be difficult to predict the overall timeline and budget. Because work is done in short sprints and the scope can change, it may be challenging to determine exactly when the project will be completed or how much it will cost. However, this is offset by the ability to make ongoing adjustments based on real-time feedback.
Agile's focus on collaboration and frequent communication can also be a pro or con, depending on the team. Teams that work well together and value transparency will benefit from Agile's emphasis on daily stand-ups and regular sprint reviews. However, for teams that are less communicative or prefer independent work, this constant collaboration may feel burdensome.
Waterfall's linear approach can sometimes lead to delays if a phase takes longer than expected. Once a phase is behind schedule, it can delay the entire project. Agile, by contrast, provides more room for flexibility, which allows teams to re-prioritise tasks and adapt as the project progresses.
For projects that require frequent feedback from stakeholders or need to stay aligned with changing user needs, Agile offers a clear advantage. Waterfall's more formal review process is often done at the end of each phase, making it harder to incorporate feedback until later stages. Agile ensures that stakeholders are involved throughout the project, enabling teams to adjust based on their input.
Both Agile and Waterfall have distinct advantages and drawbacks. Waterfall offers structure and predictability, making it ideal for projects with fixed requirements, while Agile offers flexibility and responsiveness, making it suitable for dynamic projects. Choosing the right methodology depends on the specific needs of your project and the nature of the work involved.