The Hybrid Approach... The best of both worlds or just "Waterfall in disguise"?

Agile Disciplined Agile

Francisco Herrera

Community Champion

Program Manager, PPM&PMO Specialist.| Coppel, Mexico. Culiacán, Sinaloa, Mexico

Nowadays, many organizations claim to work in "Hybrid" environments, trying to combine the financial security of predictive methods with the flexibility of Agile.

However, in practice, we often see projects that start with fixed scopes, rigid budgets, and strict deadlines set by upper management. The execution team simply holds daily meetings and divides the work into "sprints" without any real capacity to adapt or prioritize based on value. Basically, it just becomes "Agile theater" or Waterfall with a different name.

My question for the group is:

What strategies have actually worked for you to manage sponsors who want the flexibility of Agile, but still demand the absolute certainty of a predictive approach from day one?

I would love to read your experiences and solutions!

Posted: Oct 12, 2026 12:56 PM

Rami Kaibni

Community Champion

Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten Associates New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada

Francisco, I believe it really depends on the nature of the project, the phase of the project, and the level of uncertainty involved. Hybrid project management should not mean simply combining Agile ceremonies with a traditional Waterfall framework. It should mean selecting the most appropriate management approach for different aspects of the project.

For example, in our construction projects, we often use a hybrid approach in which the design phase is managed more adaptively, allowing for iterations, collaboration, feedback, and refinement as requirements evolve. However, once we move into construction execution, the approach becomes much more predictive, given the importance of contractual commitments, cost and schedule control, procurement lead times, construction sequencing, and coordination among multiple trades and stakeholders.

At the same time, we incorporate Lean Construction principles and practices, such as lookahead planning, constraint identification and removal, advance procurement planning, and collaborative short-term production planning, to improve workflow reliability and respond to emerging issues before they affect the overall project.

In my view, the key to managing sponsor expectations is not to promise absolute certainty from day one, but to establish clear boundaries around what can and cannot be known at each stage. Sponsors can have visibility into the overall budget, schedule, major milestones, and key risks without requiring every detail to be fixed before sufficient information is available.

For instance, we can establish a baseline for the overall project while allowing design solutions to evolve within agreed cost, schedule, and performance parameters. As uncertainty decreases and design maturity increases, commitments become progressively more detailed and reliable.

Ultimately, I believe a successful hybrid approach is about being predictive where predictability is necessary, adaptive where learning and change add value, and disciplined about managing the interfaces between the two. Otherwise, like you said, we risk creating Agile theater rather than genuinely benefiting from either approach.

Posted: Oct 12, 2026 2:31 PM

Please login or join to reply

The Hybrid Approach... The best of both worlds or just "Waterfall in disguise"?

Sponsors

Newsletters