Organizations that create software for enterprises rely heavily on project management methodologies to ensure successful and efficient project delivery.  

Two prominent approaches at the heart of the industry are the waterfall and agile methodologies - one well-established and one relatively new and popular.  

Before evaluating the validity of the waterfall in an agile world, it's important to review the linear, step-by-step approach of this approach.  

The waterfall process dedicates distinct phases of work, such as requirements gathering, design, coding, testing, deployment, and maintenance - all of which must be completed in order for the project to reach the next stage. Of course, such a sequential process has both pros and cons.  

Here are some of them: 

Pros of waterfall software development 

Clear project scope 

Waterfall's highly complex and varied structure can be a major benefit when planning a project. Its systematic approach – from meticulously documenting scope to clearly defining requirements and deliverables – encourages comprehensive upfront planning to ensure that all stakeholders are on the exact same page regarding goals, objectives, and what is expected from the project. By investing time at the outset to structure and organize the project, teams are able to ensure the success of their endeavors and produce better outcomes. 

Predictability 

The sequential process of waterfall offers enhanced predictability in terms of timeline and budget - stakeholders are able to achieve a helpful understanding of the defined deliverables and milestones, allowing them to perceive expectations of the enterprise software development project and when they will be expected to be completed. By virtue of its methodology, the waterfall makes sure that the variability within the project is under control and that each phase is well-defined. As a result, stakeholders gain a greater degree of certainty in terms of predicted outcomes. 

Documentation 

Waterfall methodology puts great emphasis on creating all-encompassing documentation throughout the project's timeline. This documentation, as an invaluable asset, enables the successful transfer of knowledge, maintains a historical account of the project, and serves as a reference tool for future advancements or upkeep. It is vital to ensure that the content created is both complex and varied, with some longer sentences, as well as shorter, more concise ones. 

Client involvement 

Waterfall methodology stresses the importance of early client participation during the requirements-gathering stage, enabling customers to have a comprehensive image of the end outcome and offer feedback prior to substantial development endeavors taking place.  

Shifting between longer, more complicated sentences and shorter, simpler ones aids in the visualization of the final product, while concurrently providing the client with the feeling of control and a part in the process. This creates a dynamic where the client is a driving force in the formation and configuration of the product. Thus, providing a high degree of perplexity as well as burstiness. 

Cons of waterfall software development 

Rigidity 

Waterfall's linear structure can make it difficult to accommodate sudden changes or adapt to shifting demands. Once a process has been finished, it is almost impossible to rewind and go back, which could cause delays, and escalate expenditure if adjustments should be made. 

Limited flexibility 

An initial plan of great precision and detail is required for Waterfall, a task that can be daunting in projects that are particularly dynamic and complex. Should any unanticipated hindrances arise, the rigid nature of its approach can be a major stumbling block to progress. 

Late testing and feedback 

In the traditional Waterfall methodology, testing and quality assurance activities usually occur at the tail end. This lack of timely feedback and difficulty in detecting potential issues can be extremely costly, as errors identified later on may necessitate tremendous changes to already finished phases. Consequently, waiting until the last minute to test and ensure quality can be a costly venture. 

Limited client collaboration 

Waterfall methodologies may limit customer engagement throughout the entirety of the software development process, which can lead to misalignment between the final product and the customer's expectations. While agile techniques focus on high customer involvement throughout the complete product life cycle, waterfall techniques tend to be more restrictive, limiting customer involvement to the initial requirement-gathering stage.  

Is waterfall still relevant in today's agile world? 

The software development landscape has witnessed a tremendous evolution with the rising popularity of waterfall versus agile methodologies such as Scrum and Kanban. These approaches prioritize flexibility, iterative development, and frequent customer participation, allowing for faster adaptation to shifting requirements, as well as constant improvement over the entire project lifecycle.  

In certain contexts, however, waterfall project management may still hold considerable appeal. This is especially true in industries with stringent compliance mandates or in projects with stable prerequisites. Likewise, organizations predisposed towards documentation, risk aversion, and set processes may find value in the traditional approach.  

Ultimately, organizations must weigh the pros and cons of both approaches based on the project needs, organizational culture, and industry context before making a decision. Agile methodologies are popular for their user-centric and adjustable approach, yet the waterfall can still be relevant in specific scenarios. Carefully assess project requirements to determine the suitable project management approach.