This topic is part of a chapter in an upcoming book
There has not been any significant mention of alternative approaches such as Agile, Scrum, iterative, and incremental in this book so far. The main reason for this is because the CAMMP™ Model is an adaptive model, which can incorporate Agile, Scrum, or Incremental principles. The author does not believe in Agile or Scrum as standalone approaches or methods for managing a project end-to-end from a project owner perspective.
Here is why!
All projects, from a project (business) owner perspective, must start with an idea, alignment to strategic objectives, feasibility, and authorization. These steps are in line with the approach presented here; following a traditional life cycle model with phases and stages. In other words, project owners have to follow a phase-stage approach. It is also worth noting that often the early stage(s) are led by the business owner (internal or external).
After a certain point along the project life cycle, organizations may assign the project to developers, whether internal or external service providers, let’s call them development agency. In this case, the development agency is working on a single stage (or combining two or three stages) of the business project life cycle. For this stage, or more, the development agency may use Agile principles. Therefore, for the agency, they say they are using ‘Agile’ methodology, but in reality, they are working on a piece of a project that has phases and stages; and Agile and Scrum usage is limited to a part of the project; one or more phases, not the whole life cycle.
Could Agile be used start to finish? Maybe, but how?
To summarize (and partially repeat), what is different in the Agile or incremental environment is that a project start following a waterfall-like approach but when the project reaches the stages of definition and implementation (requirements, design, development, testing) the project team can merge these stages to follow the Agile or incremental approach. In other words, one or two phases of the project could adopt Agile or Scrum, but from within CAMMP™. In the last few years, it has been becoming apparent that “WAgile” or “AgiWater,” whatever name one uses for the blended approach, are becoming popular due to the shortcomings of the pure approaches.
In closing, the CAMMP™ Model is not a waterfall model. It is a model that is adaptive, hence the name Customizable and Adaptable Methodology for Managing Projects™. The stages in CAMMP™ may overlap and the degree of overlap is a function of the project and organizational preferences. The author view is that any project must follow a project life cycle with the early phases done in a traditional, sequential approach, with some overlaps. Then, depending on the nature of the project, it would either continue to follow a sequence of the stages building on each other or once the project reaches a point where Agile principles will add value, the project owner of development agency can adopt them. Then finish the project with a proper close stage.
Figure 10-2 presents a possible model on how CAMMP™ can integrate Agile or Scrum principles into its project life cycle. Two points to raise here in relation to the image:
- The Requirements Stage is to reflect the business requirements, may be high level and would be different from the Requirements element in the circle.
- Although the figure shows one cycle, the intent is that this cycle would repeat based on project’s needs such as the segments durations or the size of the work increments.