Agile vs. Waterfall: Which Development Methodology is Right for Your Project?

Development methodologies – Agile vs Waterfall. Which one is the right for your project? In this article we will explore the pro’s and con’s of these two methodologies.

Agile vs Waterfall Methodology

As a software development company, constantly seeking ways to stay in the current, we realize the importance of choosing the right project management methodology. Two of the most widely used and typical approaches are Agile and Waterfall, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. Deciding between the two can depend on the requirements of the current project, its timeline or even how the team communicates and what are the specificities of its dynamics. In this post, we’ll break down the pros and cons of both Agile and Waterfall to help you determine the right methodology for your next project.

Waterfall: The Traditional Approach

What is Waterfall?

Starting off with the classics: Waterfall, which has a linear, sequential approach to software development. In such projects there is clear division into distinct phases: first there is gathering of requirements, followed by designing and development, followed by testing and, finally, deploying the software. In this methodology, you have to complete each phase before moving on to the next one. This comes with very little flexibility for changes once the project has been initiated. In such a way, Waterfall provides a structured, step-by-step process, which makes it easier to track progress and ensure each phase is fully completed before the next begins.

  • Structured & Easy to Understand: The clear, linear progression of phases makes it easy to follow and helps for the team to visualize the project path from start to finish. This is especially true for projects with well-defined requirements. 
  • Predictable Timeline: Since each phase is completed before the next begins, it’s easier to estimate project timelines and costs. In the case of long-term schedules for the projects or those with fixed-deadlines, this methodology can be especially useful.
  • Ideal for Documentation: Waterfall produces comprehensive documentation at every stage, which allows for great clarity on deliverables of the project, but also roles for the teammates, and clear responsibilities. This aids in creating detailed reports for stakeholders when necessary. 
  • Suitable for Stable Projects: In industries where more regulations are applied, Waterfall can be very well-suited, if the requirements are unlikely to change once the development process begins.
  • Inflexibility: Once a phase is completed, it’s difficult and expensive to go back and make changes after a phase is completed within such a methodology. This can be a major drawback if the project scope or requirements change or even evolve during development.
  • Late Testing: Testing is conducted only after the development phase is complete. This can become very expensive if any reworking is necessary, as this can mean that some critical issues can emerge way too late in the process.
  • Slow to Respond to Change: If project requirements shift midway, the Waterfall method and its linear can be inefficient, because it doesn’t really allow for any changes and adapting to any new priorities. 
  • Risk of Misalignment: The project can be at risk, if when gathering the initial requirements for the project some information was missing or incomplete or even inaccurate. In this methodology it is very challenging to incorporate feedback once the project is already in motion.

Agile: The Flexible Approach

The more modern approach that we typically use within our company is Agile – the iterative and incremental approach to software development. In Agile teams work in short periods of time called sprints—which typically last between 2 and 4 week cycles. Within the sprints the team are supposed to deliver small, functional pieces of the project. This methodology is unique as it encourages collaboration within and between teams. It also allows for constant feedback and adaptation throughout the project lifecycle, contrary to Waterfall. Agile also embraces the fact that project requirements are often evolving and allow for more flexibility and quicker responses to changes.

  • Flexibility: Agile allows for changes and adjustments all the time throughout the project and this makes this method ideal for projects where the requirements are not clearly defined or might evolve in time. In this way the end product would always meet user needs even as those needs evolve.
  • Continuous Feedback: Agile thrives on regular stakeholder input and sprint reviews. Constant and continuous feedback is not only welcome, it is needed and this is why stakeholders are involved at every stage, which allows for the project to always stay and develop aligned with business goals.
  • Faster Delivery: Agile teams can release functional parts of the project earlier in the process which allows for the end-users to start benefiting from the product sooner. This can, in line, allow for faster and earlier feedback, which can be taken into account by the teams while still working on the project. 
  • Collaboration-Driven: Agile fosters stronger collaboration in the teams and between the team involving all developers, designers, and clients. This means that all teams work together more closely, especially compared to Waterfall and can quickly and dynamically adapt to any feedback and real-time input from users and results.
  • Uncertain Timelines: Due to its flexible nature, it’s harder to predict the overall timeline and budget in Agile projects. It works in iterations, but this also means that new priorities can emerge, which might extend the project timeline unexpectedly.
  • Less Documentation: Agile emphasizes working software over comprehensive documentation. While this accelerates development, it can be challenging when knowledge transfer has to occur or when new team members have to be onboarded mid-project.
  • Requires High Client Involvement: Agile relies on constant communication and client feedback, which can be demanding, because Clients have to stay actively involved throughout the project. This is the only way to ensure completely that the deliverables of the project are meeting the set expectations. 
  • Difficult to Scale: Agile works well for smaller, focused teams. However, it cannot be directly used for bigger teams. This would mean that when it has to be scaled for larger, more complex projects the teams would require a more robust framework, like Scrum or SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework), to maintain organization and efficiency.

How to Choose Between Agile and Waterfall

Both methodologies seem useful, but they can also be divided by their disadvantages. Choosing between the two truly depends on each project individually. Next time, when deciding between Agile and Waterfall, consider the following factors:

  • Waterfall: This method is best suited for projects with clearly defined and stable requirements, where each phase can be carefully planned out in advance.
  • Agile: This method is perfect for projects where requirements are likely to change or if during the projects any ongoing adjustments might be needed throughout development.
  • Waterfall: It is usually better for projects with fixed deadlines and budgets. The structured approach allows for better planning and cost estimation upfront.
  • Agile: Conversely, Agile is more suitable for projects with flexible timelines and budgets, allowing teams to adapt as new priorities or needs arise.
  • Waterfall: This methodology works great for teams that prefer a structured, predictable environment with minimal disruptions once the project has begun.
  • Agile: This method is best for teams that value ongoing collaboration and client input, ensuring that the project evolves with the needs of the client.
  • Waterfall: Can be riskier in projects based on untested assumptions, as issues discovered late in development can be costly to address.
  • Agile: Agile’s iterative process reduces risk by allowing teams to test, adapt, and iterate on smaller increments of the project, ensuring that issues are caught earlier and are easier to fix.

As we can see, there is no one-size-fits-all answer when it comes to choosing between Agile and Waterfall. Both methodologies have their strengths and weaknesses, and the right choice will depend on your specific project needs, team sizes and stakeholder and client engagement.

On one hand, Agile is best suited for projects that demand flexibility, adaptability, and constant iteration, making it perfect for evolving requirements and dynamic project environments. Waterfall, on the other hand, is ideal for projects with well-defined, unchanging requirements, where a structured, linear approach will ensure timely completion and clear documentation.

The conclusion that we suggest drawing here, is the importance of understanding the strengths and weaknesses of both methodologies. Only when each one is evaluated, you can select the right approach properly, which would ensure that everything will align with your team, client, and project goals. By carefully evaluating factors like project scope, timeline, budget, and team preferences, you’ll be better equipped to choose the methodology that ensures your project’s success.

If you need teams that work with a specific methodology or you wish to talk to experts in both methodologies to choose the one that matches your company dynamic, don’t hesitate to contact us!