Get ready for agile methods, with care

TLDR

Agile and plan‑driven methods are often viewed as opposites, yet blending them can broaden the toolkit; real‑world cases illustrate both the benefits of responsiveness and the risks of over‑reacting to change, which can lead to costly failures. The author argues that both agile and plan‑driven approaches have legitimate roles and that extreme interpretations of either are unwarranted. The study concludes that while each approach excels in its own domain, a combined approach is feasible and preferable in certain circumstances.

Abstract

Although many of their advocates consider the agile and plan-driven software development methods polar opposites, synthesizing the two can provide developers with a comprehensive spectrum of tools and options. Real-world examples argue for and against agile methods. Responding to change has been cited as the critical technical success factor in the Internet browser battle between Microsoft and Netscape. But overresponding to change has been cited as the source of many software disasters, such as the $3 billion overrun of the US Federal Aviation Administration's Advanced Automation System for national air traffic control. The author believes that both agile and plan-driven approaches have a responsible center and overinterpreting radical fringes. Agile and plan-driven methods both form part of the planning spectrum. Thus, while each approach has a home ground within which it performs very well, and much better than the other, a combined approach is feasible and preferable in some circumstances.