May 14, 2018 12:26 PM
Replying to Michael Brian
...
I think the statement is true for particular applications such as projects within construction. Here a waterfall approach seems fitting and agile makes sense. In such a project you want high value, high quality work. Adding an agile method makes sense as it allows you to focus on each section of building in a waterfall methodology to ensure that every step created has high value and quality. It can allow you to limit risks by applying such focus based actions in a smaller chunk of time verses stretching a project where scope creep or other risks can find their way in.
Sort of like studying... Studying something for 1.5 hours and barely retaining any information is worthless compared to focused and attentive study for 30 minutes with more information retained.
There’s many methodologies to utilize and if the masses of project involve a waterfall approach than adding agile methods would be a positive consideration.
As I have not touched on agile methods and still early in my learning, I can imagine this method increases the potential risk or consequences within these sprints of work being done. I think quality, cost, and scope monitoring would be a huge factor to maintains a single oversight can throw things off and since agile approaches tend to speed things up with more focus demand, everyone involved needs to be present at all times in their actions. But I do think agile method does help to eliminate distractions when sticking with a schedule. To focus on each piece of the puzzle can definitely bring higher quality work to the project.
