Agile and Waterfall are distinct and somewhat opposite approaches to structuring your team’s efforts on a project. A traditional waterfall structure progresses linearly through predetermined phases that build on each other. Conversely, an Agile framework forgoes a clear set of phases in favor of smaller cycles, which incorporate frequent testing, daily team collaboration and ongoing input from stakeholders.
Featured Partners
1
monday.com
Yes
From $8 monthly per user
Zoom, LinkedIn, Adobe, Salesforce and more
2
ClickUp
Yes, for unlimited members
$7 per month
Slack, Microsoft Outlook, HubSpot, Salesforce, Timely, Google Drive and more
3
Wrike
Yes
$10 per user per month
Salesforce, Adobe, Miro, Netsuite, QuickBooks, SAP
4
Hubspot
Yes
$15 per seat per month
Zoom, Slack, Google Workspace, QuickBooks and more
Agile vs. Waterfall: Brief Overview
These project management strategies can apply to any project across industries. It’s important to note that most projects incorporate aspects of both—some planning and budgeting upfront, with frequent intrateam and customer check-ins throughout the process to make sure everything looks good. Similarly, project management software can support Agile or Waterfall. However, it’s helpful to be aware of their differences and strengths, to choose strategies that work best for your project.
Waterfall Methodology
A Waterfall approach breaks down the project timeline into distinct steps that are completed linearly, so that each step builds upon the one before it. Typically, project managers map everything out at the beginning—the timeline, each phase and its due date, staff and task assignments, anticipated costs and resources. Each concurrent step must be completed before the following one begins. This continues until the last phase completes and the project is presented to the customer.
- General approach: Linear; step-by-step, with distinct phases that build
- Documentation: Comprehensive and detailed from the project’s start
- Customer feedback: Less; only received at the beginning and final product launch
- Team collaboration: Infrequent; typically occurs during transition between phases
- Visual tools: Gantt charts, flow charts
- Best for: Projects that have a clear idea of the end goal; projects on a strict budget or timeline; simple projects requiring less collaboration and feedback
Pros and Cons of a Waterfall Approach
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| Clear structure, timeline and costs: With a timeline and phase structure mapped out upfront, every team member, stakeholder and customer has a clear idea of the calendar, costs and end goal. | Chaotic transitions: Handoffs and transitions between phases and teams might involve confusion and questions. |
| Requires less coordination: Since each project phase is mapped out ahead of time, it’s easier for each team or department to focus on its tasks without worrying about new variables or coordinating with other teams. | Less collaborative: A waterfall process goes one phase at a time, with departments only collaborating when they hand the product off between phases. This is a more siloed approach that risks misalignment on a project. |
| Comprehensive documentation: A waterfall approach frontloads planning by creating a more detailed and complete blueprint of the project timeline, staffing and costs. | Potential for bottlenecks: If one phase experiences a holdup or delay, this may push back every phase that follows. |
| Easily replicable: If a project delivers a great result, the clear documentation makes it easy to replicate the process in the future. | Limited stakeholder feedback: With a strict waterfall methodology, customers are only able to provide feedback during the planning and end stages, meaning they have less input during the creation process. |
| Less chance of delays: Since a Waterfall approach only receives input from stakeholders at the beginning and end stages, it’s less likely that customer requests for modifications or features will delay the process. | Struggles to adapt to variables: Waterfall’s rigid, siloed and preplanned step-by-step structure can make it difficult for teams to identify and adapt to unforeseen variables and requested changes, should those arise. |
Agile Framework
While Waterfall utilizes a rigid and predetermined sequence of phases, an Agile framework prioritizes adaptation, collaboration and feedback throughout the project life cycle. With these principles as a priority, an Agile structure is looser than one using Waterfall.
While Agile-focused project managers and scrum masters develop project scopes, they are less defined than those found in predictive methodologies. Projects typically break the structure into a more fluid series of small cycles that incorporate daily intrateam collaboration and frequent stakeholder feedback. Each cycle may include planning, designing, implementing and coding, testing and getting the product in front of the customer for feedback.
Meanwhile, teams may be working on different aspects of the project simultaneously, conferring with each other as new requests roll in or problems are identified. This cycle repeats indefinitely, responding to each new round of feedback until the project is complete and the final launch occurs.
- General approach: Cyclical and iterative; relies on ongoing, repeated small cycles or “sprints” that incorporate customer feedback
- Documentation: Less; more flexible roadmap and timeline
- Customer feedback: Frequent, often weekly or biweekly; built into every cycle
- Team collaboration: Daily; ongoing; heavily prioritized
- Visual tools: Kanban boards, scrum boards
- Best for: Software development; more complex projects; projects requiring more testing, collaboration and feedback from customers
Pros and Cons of an Agile Approach
| Pros | Cons |
|---|---|
| More flexible: Since Agile centers around collaboration, feedback and cross-functional team members, it does a better job identifying issues and responding to variables. | Unclear roadmap: Since an Agile process is more flexible and consists of smaller iterations, the initial blueprint and plan aren’t as clearly organized as with Waterfall. |
| Increased collaboration: When employing an Agile approach, departments and teams often confer daily to share updates on progress, testing, software bugs, etc. There are agile project management software platforms to help keep everything organized. | May require a change in collaborative structure: Team members may have to develop new skills or learn to collaborate in new ways to keep things organized within an Agile framework. |
| Consistent feedback from stakeholders: Agile builds feedback into each iteration or “cycle,” allowing weekly or biweekly opportunities for customers to request features or changes. This leads to greater satisfaction with the final product. | Unreliable timeline: While an Agile approach can respond to unforeseen variables and stakeholder requests, such as for new features, these requests may surpass the anticipated timeline. In an extreme case, this can lead to scope creep. |
| Ongoing testing: While a Waterfall saves testing for one of the final phases pre-launch, Agile tests during every cycle or iteration. This allows more opportunities to identify and fix issues. | Difficult to predict costs: Since Agile’s feedback-oriented approach invites more variables throughout the process, it’s difficult to predict resource needs and cost requirements upfront. |
| Fosters dedication: Since an Agile approach usually requires team members to handle multiple roles and collaborate throughout the life cycle, team members are often more invested in the final product’s quality. | Less clear documentation: With less of a clear initial roadmap and frequent adaptations made along the way, it’s harder to document and reproduce what worked well on a project that used an Agile framework. |
What to Consider When Choosing Between Agile vs. Waterfall
Many projects, regardless of industry, utilize a blend of Agile and Waterfall methodologies. A waterfall approach is typically helpful for the initial budgeting, resource planning and mapping out timelines. However, some aspects of a project—like the development, implementation, testing and feedback phases—often require multiple teams to work concurrently. You may also want to get your product or plans in front of your customer several times before the final launch, which borrows from an Agile philosophy.
Here are some factors to consider when contemplating Agile vs. Waterfall for a project:
Type of Product
The type of project you’re working on is crucial in deciding how much of an Agile or Waterfall approach you’ll use. Software and IT projects tend to lean more toward an Agile philosophy, because developing software requires teamwork for project coding, testing to identify bugs and customer feedback to ensure the program includes the desired functionality. Marketing campaigns also tend to favor Agile because an agency must remain ready to adapt to incoming performance data.
However, physical products—such as those in manufacturing and construction industries—often incorporate elements from a Waterfall methodology. These projects often require certain steps to be completed before others can begin, such as creating the blueprint for a building before you start building walls. It’s important to document the whole process before you begin.
Clarity About What the End Result Should Look Like
Waterfall is a more regimented process, with a roadmap laid out ahead of time. If your team and customers have a clear initial idea about what the final product should look like—including the deadline and the budget—having a reliable and rigid process keeps you organized.
Matt Bolton, an experienced project management expert and business development director at Parallel Project Training, sums up Waterfall’s value: “Waterfall tends to work best when you’ve got a clear idea of the end goal from day one. If the requirements are fixed, the budget is set, and there’s not much room for change, then a structured, linear approach makes sense. We see this a lot in sectors like construction or manufacturing, where each phase needs sign-off before the next one starts.”
Agile provides more value when you anticipate a shifting idea of what the end product will look like, such as changes in a marketing plan or an app whose exact feature set you’re still considering.
Strictness of Deadlines and Budget
If the project is operating on a strict timeline with rigid due dates and a set budget, upfront planning will be necessary. Some aspects of a Waterfall approach are inevitable in these cases, as you create reliable documentation for what resources, staffing and phases the project will require.
However, if you have some flexibility in your budget or a customer with a looser deadline in mind, Agile’s adaptive structure can lead to improvements in your product. Since it enables additional testing, collaboration and feedback, you may stumble upon new ideas for features or potential problems that may have never been identified with a waterfall approach.
Stakeholder Involvement and Feedback
If your stakeholders, customers and clients take a more hands-off approach, Waterfall’s more rigid roadmap can be efficient. This framework is reliable and reduces unforeseen variables because every team knows what is expected of them. This process can be especially efficient if it’s a product similar to ones you’ve made before, such as an item, application or building.
On the other hand, more open-ended projects often benefit from multiple rounds of customer feedback throughout the project life cycle. This increases the likelihood of delivering your stakeholders a finished product that they’re happy with. Bolton elaborates on the value of customer feedback by saying, “Agile allows teams to adapt as they go, with regular check-ins and faster feedback loops. It’s more fluid, and it puts working solutions in front of people sooner.”
Finding a Balance Between Agile and Waterfall Methodology
Agile and Waterfall project management methodologies both have their strong points. Agile’s cyclical approach is more flexible, collaborative and incorporates more feedback during the process. Waterfall maps out a more rigid roadmap ahead of time, with distinct steps that build upon each other.
Thankfully, you won’t have to choose between them. Most projects borrow elements from both—planning some phases or steps upfront but incorporating customer feedback and simultaneous work between departments during certain portions of the project.
Agile vs. Waterfall FAQs
What is the key difference between Agile and Waterfall?
Agile is a more flexible approach that divides the project life cycle into smaller ongoing iterations, or cycles, that incorporate collaboration and stakeholder feedback. Waterfall is a more rigid approach that plans the project ahead of time as a series of distinct phases that build upon each other, with less collaboration and feedback during the life cycle.
Is SDLC a Waterfall or Agile?
The software development life cycle (SDLC) typically relies more on an Agile framework than Waterfall, since software requires teams to frequently test for bugs. Software development also requires teams—such as the backend and frontend developers—to collaborate daily, which aligns with an Agile philosophy.
What is a real-world example of Waterfall and Agile?
If a construction company building a house plans each phase ahead of time—drawing blueprints, creating a schedule, hiring contractors, setting a budget, building the foundation, then walls and finally carpeting—this successive approach is an example of Waterfall. On the other hand, a marketing agency adapting to campaign metrics and KPIs, and revising its approach, exemplifies Agile.
