Agile? Waterfall? - Pick Carefully or Pay the Price!

Managing projects across an enterprise is an art as well as a science. There are several well known paradigms used by organizations across the world - waterfall to agile with variations in-between. I have always told those that have asked that there is not one silver bullet to magically solve the project management puzzle. In fact, my recommendations to people have always been to create a project management paradigm that fits the culture and needs of the organization.

My teams work in an industry that is heavily regulated by state and federal agencies and also must conform to several industry governing entities that set standards within the payments space. Many of the projects that we work on are implementing standard interfaces between the various payment networks, acquirer, issuers and other players within the financial industry space. Implementing these interfaces is a technical exercise with very little to no user interface. You either get the spec right or the money doesn't move. These initiatives really are not setup to be run utilizing agile techniques.

Now, let me shift over to some of the other initiatives we run within the organization. Our mobile and internet applications. As you can probably guess, these applications have significant user interfaces. These project efforts can utilize and benefit from agile techniques that can give our 'user representatives' much quicker access to potential solutions as well as drive increased cooperation between the development, user and quality assurance teams. This is a place where our teams are experimenting with agile techniques as a way to accelerate delivery through the development channel.

One organization utilizing different project management paradigms based on the unique needs of the initiative!

I'm running at this from two different directions at the same time:

1. I'm working with our project management organization to review our overall defined lifecycle to recommend changes that will allow projects that might benefit from being run utilizing agile techniques to take advantage of a slimmed down process.  We still need to figure out how to satisfy the documentation requirements of the various state/federal agencies and industry governing bodies, but overall, they are supportive of our desire to create multiple lanes that can be managed differently based on the overall risk of the effort.
2. I'm encouraging our project managers and team members to challenge the process. When working any individual initiative within the overall portfolio to make recommendations to skip various project artifacts, project steps or entire slices of the overall project lifecycle. The key is to document the decision as to why decisions are being made to skip certain pieces of the lifecycle based on risk and impacts to the overall effort.

This is what works in the enterprise that I currently work for. 

On a regular basis, I have to sit across the table from auditors and prove to them that all of the appropriate documentation has been generated. That there is traceability though the project effort from requirements, through design and testing. I have to show them our implementation and fallback plans as well as prove that those plans were followed during actual implementations. Our auditors will randomly pick projects and then go through all of the documentation and measure it against the documented lifecycle to ensure that it's all there. If something is missing, there has to be proof - either through project meeting notes or via change requests - that show the decision was made to skip the document/project step(s). This proof also needs to discuss the risk to the product, the enterprise, our financial institutions, acquirers and/or processors. It is the goal of our project management organization to manage these risk issues and ensure that we are safeguarding our ability to process payment transactions and move money within the payments space.

In past lives with other organizations I've run the gamut from running lifecycles that are even more formal than the one my teams currently use to running very informal lifecycles similar to the agile paradigm. The key is understanding the culture of the organization, the risk tolerance within the organization and the  time to market pressures within the industry.  As leaders within your organization, it's your job to discuss these issues and build processes that match the particular needs of your organization, manage the risk to the organization and your customers and build a project lifecycle paradigm that can deliver.

If you'd like more information on my background: LinkedIn Profile