Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data
June 10, 2026 | Live Webinar
Method Madness
Jeff Oltmann has over 25 years of experience developing new products and managing successful programs. His specialties include strategy deployment, project excellence, and program and portfolio management. He is principal consultant at Synergy Professional Services.
The war of words between some agile advocates and waterfall traditionalists shows no signs of ceasing, but growing numbers of project leaders and teams are choosing not to choose sides. Instead, they recognize value in both approaches, and they apply their techniques based on the needs and realities of each project.
There’s a war or words raging. On one side are ardent agilists, who advocate managing projects using methods such as Scrum and XP. On the other side are traditionalists, who prefer waterfall methods. Just look at the venom in these headlines and stinging excerpts from recent articles on project management and product development:
“The Agile Method and Other Fairy Tales”
“Rigid vs. Agile”
“Waterfall methods are notorious for leading one to believe projects are on schedule when, in fact, they are not.”
“Agile proponents are the leaders of a dysfunctional industry.”
What are these opposing approaches to managing projects? It’s a bit hard to pin down — and that’s part of the confusion — but here’s a broad distinction. “Traditional” methods are planning-driven — they place a high value on early and thorough planning before executing the plan. Agile methods emphasize flexibility and incrementalism over detailed planning through a …
Please log in or sign up below to read the rest of the article.
ADVERTISEMENTS