As enterprise IT faces pressure to accelerate delivery and stay aligned with evolving customer needs, a shift is underway from the rigid Waterfall methodology to the more adaptive Agile model. Agile’s continuous feedback loops and faster time-to-market have made it the go-to choice for organisations navigating uncertainty and seeking innovation. Yet, experts note that Waterfall continues to find favour in projects with fixed requirements, stringent regulatory demands or where documentation and predictability are critical.
The Waterfall model is a step-by-step method used in IT projects where each phase is completed before moving to the next. It works best when project requirements are clear from the start and do not change much, and when stakeholder involvement is minimal during execution.
In contrast, Agile is flexible and works in short cycles with regular feedback, making it better for projects that need to quickly adjust to changes and involve stakeholders throughout. Alongside, Agile also supports the development of IP-led solutions and enables a shift towards product-led service models through its iterative and user-focused approach.
Shailesh Muvera, Senior Principal Analyst at Gartner, explained that factors like the stability of project requirements, desired stakeholder involvement, regulatory compliance needs and project complexity drive the choice between the two delivery models.
“Enterprise IT is increasingly shifting away from traditional Waterfall models towards Agile methodologies. This evolution is largely driven by market dynamics demanding faster time-to-market, the rise of digital and cloud-native technologies and heightened customer expectations. Empirical evidence and industry reports consistently indicate higher success rates and better adaptability for Agile projects,” he said.
Joseph Anantharaju, Co-Chairman and CEO of Happiest Minds Technologies, a “born digital, born agile” company, shared that currently, 95-96 per cent of Happiest Minds’ revenues come from Agile-based projects, with the remaining four per cent from areas like hardware development, where Agile is not always feasible.
He noted that in the digital space, unless an organisation is building a well-defined mobile app or a specified connected device, it has to follow a sequential approach with a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) to get validation from customers. This kind of iterative development is only possible with an Agile model.
“For instance, if you’re building a communication box, you need to complete the entire unit before testing and releasing it. This requires more of a semi-Waterfall approach. But aside from such cases, our teams follow Agile Scrum across the board,” he said.
Technology-driven transformation sits at the core of large and complex change programs. It typically includes upgrading to modern technologies, simplifying or consolidating legacy systems and ensuring the availability of accurate enterprise data for timely decision-making. The success of these programmes is pivoted on cross-functional organisational skills. Organisations need business experts with deep customer and functional knowledge, a wide range of technology specialists and change management professionals to lead and support the adoption of new ways of working.
“To achieve this, organisations are dependent on agile and hybrid agile programme management frameworks. A pod-based cross-functional team construct is leveraged by many to quickly form teams to serve cross-functional requirements and make such teams work across the programme lifecycle. These ways of working have accelerated such multi-skilled requirements of today’s transformation programmes,” said Siddhartha Tipnis, Partner and Tech Sector Leader, Deloitte India.
Alongside, delivery timelines and feedback mechanisms differ between the methodologies. Waterfall’s sequential phases mean the full value of the work is often undelivered until the project’s completion, leading to potential gaps in stakeholder awareness and delayed issue discovery.
Agile’s iterative cycles, on the other hand, enable early and regular delivery of working software, enabling continuous improvement. It also allows clients and business users to maintain an updated understanding of project status. This ongoing engagement and transparency typically lead to greater client satisfaction and a higher probability of achieving desired outcomes.
However, that Waterfall still makes sense for certain projects, particularly those with stable requirements, complex regulatory environments or large-scale initiatives where a sequential process can ensure meticulous tracking and documentation. In such cases, Waterfall’s rigid structure and thorough documentation practices provide stability and clarity essential for the project’s success, Muvera shared.
Published on August 3, 2025