Most real projects of any size are not purely agile or purely waterfall. They have an agile core — the part where the team is genuinely empowered to iterate — surrounded by a waterfall scaffold: the procurement, the security review, the financial milestones, the regulatory submissions. Pretending otherwise produces theatre at the edges and arguments at the seams.
The original infographic for this was a wall chart with two timelines stacked vertically and ceremonies threaded between them. The chart was useful; the substance, written out, is also useful.
What each ceremony actually delivers.
// From the waterfall scaffold
- Charter / business case. A defensible answer to “why are we spending this money?” The form is waterfall; the substance is reused throughout the agile cadence.
- Stage gates. Moments where the steering committee confirms the project should continue. Sized to the project; lightweight is fine if the project is small.
- Cutover plan. The written agreement on how the service moves from project to operations. Doesn't belong in a sprint.
- Closure. A defensible answer to “did we get what we said we would?”
// From the agile core
- Sprint planning. Translates the next slice of the backlog into a fortnight of commitments.
- Daily stand-up. A coordination ceremony. Not a status meeting.
- Sprint review. Shows working software to people who care. Surfaces misalignment early.
- Retrospective. Improves the team. Often the most valuable meeting on the calendar.
Where they meet.
The seams are the interesting part. Three patterns work in practice:
- Backlog refinement as the bridge. The agile team grooms backlog items that include the waterfall deliverables (an architecture review item, a security sign-off item, a cutover item). The backlog becomes the master schedule; the steering committee sees it through.
- Definition of Done extended to opsasto. Each backlog item's DoD includes any of the eight that apply to it: SLA defined, runbook updated, support model amended.
- Stage gates as visible review points. A stage gate is a sprint review with senior people in the room. Same artefacts; bigger audience.
The seams are the interesting part. Most failures live in the handover between scaffold and core.
What not to do.
- Don't insist the agile team produce a Gantt chart. Have the project manager maintain one if needed; don't burden the team with it.
- Don't insist the waterfall scaffold approve every sprint. Approve the scope of the increment; let the team manage the increment.
- Don't pretend the project is “fully agile” if there are real waterfall constraints. The pretence costs more than the honesty would.
The mixed model isn't a compromise. It's the model that actually describes how serious projects deliver. Naming it correctly is the first step to running it well.
From the original.
// Original artwork from opsasto.blog (2017-03)