This article offers a brief overview of the evolution and growing adoption of Hybrid project implementation methodologies, by custom merging Agile and Waterfall approaches to suit the specific needs of an organization and project.

It also explores when and how to define or tailor a Hybrid methodology effectively.

Lastly, the article addresses common challenges associated with Hybrid implementations – pitfalls often overlooked during early stages, yet critically impact project success.

This is not an in-depth comparison of the differences between Agile and Waterfall approaches.

Introduction

Although the “clash” between Agile and traditional implementation methodologies like Waterfall likely began years earlier, the publication of the Agile Manifesto in 2001 marked a significant turning point. It ushered in a shift toward more flexible, iterative approaches to product and project management centered on people, collaboration, and responsiveness to change. Frameworks such as Scrum, Kanban, and Extreme Programming (XP) emerged to provide practical ways to implement Agile principles.

Agile fundamentally challenged Waterfall’s “one-size-fits-all” model, which had long been criticized for its rigidity, difficulty adapting to evolving requirements, limited customer involvement, delayed feedback, communication barriers, and long development cycles that slowed time to market.

Organizational Resistance. Within the “Waterfall camp,” there was considerable initial skepticism and resistance from advocates of traditional, linear methodologies. Even today, remnants of that resistance persist, rooted in a reluctance to embrace change, a desire to maintain control and predictability, and a fundamental misunderstanding of Agile principles. Much of the hesitation stems from the significant mindset and practice shift that Agile demands.

Despite this, Agile’s adaptability and responsiveness steadily gained momentum. Meanwhile, Waterfall – once valued for its structured, step-by-step approach – began to fall out of favor.

Despite Agile’s growing popularity, the decline of Waterfall did not signal its end – instead, it marked a pivotal moment in its evolution.

The Limitations of Agile

Although Agile became widely adopted for its flexibility and adaptability, organizations started to acknowledge its limitations in the mid-2010s, especially in environments where structure, predictability, and regulatory compliance are crucial. This realization did not happen overnight. Gradually, concerns intensified over time, particularly around the following issues:

• Scaling Across Large or Distributed Teams – Implementing Agile at scale can be difficult, particularly across geographically dispersed teams. Additionally, Agile depends on highly skilled, self-managed teams, which can be difficult to find and sustain.

Several frameworks have emerged to address the challenges of scaling Agile beyond a single team, each with its own approach. SAFe (Scaled Agile Framework), released in 2011, is by far the most widely adopted in practice, particularly among large enterprises

• Challenges with Predictability and Planning – Agile can make it difficult to provide accurate upfront cost and timeline estimates, and it often lacks the long-term planning needed for large, complex projects
• Scope Creep Risks – In the same vein, Agile’s iterative nature and openness to change can sometimes lead to uncontrolled scope expansion, as new features and requirements are continuously introduced. This can be problematic, especially in companies where internal and external contracts are Fixed Priced, and hence the scope and timeline are not supposed to change
• Issues with Documentation and Governance – Agile’s strong focus on delivering working software sometimes comes at the expense of comprehensive documentation, which can hinder knowledge transfer, system maintenance, and audit readiness
• Compliance and Regulatory Constraints – Another angle on the documentation is compliance. In highly regulated industries, Agile projects may fail to produce the strict governance and documentation required for compliance
• Resistance and Capacity to Change – Transitioning from traditional methodologies to Agile requires a significant cultural and mindset shift. Resistance from individuals and teams accustomed to established workflows is a very common barrier to successful adoption. It is important to understand and address the real motivations behind this resistance, which is not necessarily caused by, for example, uncertainty, lack of trust, or perceived lack of benefit. It is not easy to change years of ingrained habits, expertise, and preferences matching the structured, sequential execution of Waterfall.

Some organizations choose to keep more experienced teams focused on maintaining legacy systems, while assigning younger, more Agile-savvy talent to drive new projects forward.

You may have observed similar resistance in cases where in-house developed systems (“make before buy”) are replaced by seemingly out-of-the-box software.

It’s also common for some companies to simply just lack the capacity (budget, resources, readiness) to embark on an encompassing and costly migration to a fully Agile implementation methodology

• Disruption – The initial transition to a hybrid or Agile methodology can be highly disruptive at the individual, team, and organizational levels. Managing this disruption effectively requires significant effort, planning, and investment in change management

After 2018, some enterprises began experiencing “Agile transformation fatigue”, as the anticipated benefits of agility didn’t always materialize at scale.

At the same time, industries with strict compliance and rigorous documentation requirements, such as healthcare, finance, and construction, have seen a resurgence in the use of Waterfall methodologies.

According to a 2021 survey by the Project Management Institute (PMI), nearly 40% of project managers in these industries had returned to using Waterfall methodologies. This shift was likely driven by Waterfall’s predictability, which supports key needs such as budget planning, risk assessment, and regulatory compliance, crucial elements in these highly regulated industries.

The Rise of Hybrid Approaches

The convergence of Agile transformation fatigue and a renewed appreciation for the structure and predictability of Waterfall led many organizations to embrace blended and Hybrid approaches. By strategically combining elements from both methodologies, Hybrid models emerged as a practical response to the limitations of relying on either approach in isolation.

Hybrid implementation methodologies have proven especially effective in complex, fast-evolving project environments where both structured planning and adaptive execution are essential for success. They are particularly well-suited for large-scale, complex, or regulatory-driven projects, as well as for industries experiencing rapid innovation or dynamic requirements, such as software development, where the ability to balance stability with flexibility is crucial.

Why “Custom Methodology Merging”?

Because no one-size-fits-all hybrid approach can meet the unique needs of every customer or project, a critical first step is conducting a fit-for-purpose assessment. This involves evaluating the specific characteristics, constraints, and goals of the project in order to define or adapt a custom methodology Hybrid methodology. By merging selected Agile and Waterfall elements, the resulting approach aligns with the unique “chemistry” of the project. This process is described in more detail further below.

According to Six Sigma principles on Hybrid project management, the key characteristics include the following, as outlined in the article in the link:

• The ability to maintain structured planning while accommodating change
• Integration of both sequential and iterative processes
• Flexible documentation requirements based on project needs
• Balanced stakeholder involvement throughout the project lifecycle

Since 2020, there has been a clear and growing trend toward the increased adoption of hybrid project management approaches.

Please bear with me as we take a look at some compelling numbers that shed light on this growing trend.

The Project Management Institute’s (PMI) Pulse of the Profession (February 2024) reported a 57.5% increase in hybrid project management adoption between 2020 and 2023, with usage rising from 20% to 31.5%. The graph below, taken directly from the report, clearly illustrates this upward trend and highlights the growing preference for Hybrid approaches across industries (“Predictive” refers to “Waterfall” or “Traditional” methodologies):

The report also offers the following insights into these trends:

• Hybrid is the second most popular methodology and the second most widely used project management approach, adopted by 32% of organizations, following traditional methodologies at 44%
• Agile adoption has decreased slightly, dropping by 2 percentage points to 26%
• 73% of organizations expect to increase their use of Hybrid project management approaches over the next five years
• 38% of organizations define Hybrid as primarily predictive, with some agile elements
• 37% combine both agile and predictive components throughout the project lifecycle
• 15% use mostly agile with some predictive elements
• 8% use mostly agile, but with a predictive rollout

Research by Antonio Nieto-Rodriguez, published in The Global Hybrid Project Management Survey 2024 (October 2024), supports the findings of the earlier PMI report:

• A significant 89% of professionals reported using a mix of methodologies to manage their projects. The survey found that Hybrid methods not only enhance project success rates but also improve resource management and increase flexibility
• Among the methodologies combined, Waterfall (88%) and Agile-Scrum/Kanban (84%) were the most frequently integrated
• Notably, 48% of respondents reported significant improvements in project success rates after adopting a Hybrid approach

“Custom Methodology Merging” – Tailoring a Hybrid Methodology

Back when Waterfall reigned supreme or Agile was hailed as the new Messiah, there was structure – a more or less clear checklist of what to do and in what order to be “compliant.” Strictly following a well-defined methodology gave teams a sense of security. Project managers could confidently say they were running the project by the book, and success was often measured by how closely they stuck to that chosen path. Stakeholders could sleep easier, knowing that at least from a project management standpoint, things were being handled according to industry best practices. Customers placed trust in implementation partners whose consultants were certified in proven methodologies – ones that aligned with their industry standards, organizational culture, and project goals.

In short, relying on out-of-the-box methodologies carried significant weight and often created a false sense of security. Many teams blindly followed the “scripture” of established frameworks, mistaking compliance with the method for actual project success.

Hybrid approaches have triggered a paradigm shift. No longer can organizations simply follow a single instruction manual, much like assembling one standard IKEA chair. Instead, they often need to blend parts from two different manuals, reconfigure the pieces, and tailor the design to fit their unique constraints, dependencies, culture, existing processes, and most importantly, the skill sets already present in their teams.

As mentioned earlier, no one-size-fits-all hybrid model exists. But let’s be clear: this doesn’t mean it’s a free-for-all where every project is left to reinvent the wheel. A tailored methodology must be deliberately designed, aligned with all key stakeholders, clearly documented, and formally approved during the early project definition stages.

So, at what point should we go about defining and customizing the Hybrid methodology?

Given the critical importance of defining the methodology, this task must be tackled early in the project lifecycle.

From a Waterfall perspective, this methodology definition and alignment should occur during the Initiation/Planning phase, before the Project Charter and high-level project roadmap can be finalized. In Agile terminology, this corresponds to the Envisioning/Initiation Phase, again before the Project Plan and Charter are finalized, aligned, and signed off.

By addressing this early, teams can create a shared understanding and foundation for the project, setting it up for success from the start.

Remember that in true Agile fashion, once the methodology is defined, it should be continuously refined and adapted based on ongoing feedback, lessons learned, and evolving experiences throughout the project. This ensures the methodology remains relevant and effective as the project progresses.

What key factors should be considered when designing the project methodology?

At least the following aspects need to be defined, agreed on, and meticulously documented:

• Project Stages
• Deliverables and artifacts produced by each stage
• Roles and responsibilities
• Tool Usage (collaboration, planning, tracking, reporting, etc.). For example, if Microsoft Project is used for detailed scheduling and resource management, and Atlassian Jira for project tracking and issue management, how do they integrate (manually or via tools) and avoid duplication? Will workflow be tracked using Kanban? How does information from the Scrum events and artifacts flow back into Kanban? Where is the product backlog maintained?
• The most important document templates as needed (for example, for the Migration Strategy and Plan, Cutover Strategy and Plan)

Who should participate?

Defining a tailored hybrid implementation methodology is a collaborative effort that should involve key stakeholders from across the project and the broader organization:

• The Project Manager (eventually with the support from PMO) will lead the overall execution. The PMs role is central to ensuring the approach is aligned with the project’s goals, scope, and overall timelines. With the needed knowledge of existing methodologies, the relevant training (for example, project management certifications), and project experience, this is a pivotal role in driving a structured and efficient exercise.

This activity can lend itself to what seems to be endless theoretical discussions between hardliners from Waterfall or Agile backgrounds on which would be the best way to go, and the PM’s effective moderation is called for to come to a timely and successful conclusion.

Since the participants in this conversation come from various organizational areas, the PM is called on to ensure open communication, collaboration, and consensus building. It may sometimes be necessary to translate some methodology or technical terminology to ensure that all participants are on the same page.

• The Project Sponsor(s) contribute strategic direction and alignment with organizational goals as needed. Importantly, the sponsors need to understand enough about the defined approach to feel comfortable that it will be key to a successful project outcome. Stakeholders are called on to champion this project approach with other decision-makers in the organization
• The Product Owner is to represent the customer’s needs and priorities, making sure the approach will contribute to feature development and delivery of business value
• Key Departmental Stakeholders. Depending on the scope of the project, ensure that representatives, for example, from Human Resources, Finance, Logistics, etc., are invited and in practice do participate. They must have sufficient powers delegated to them to make decisions during the working sessions
• Scrum Master / Agile Coach. Contributes expertise in agile practices and ensures they are appropriately adapted to the project’s context
• Team Leads / Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). Contribute their deep domain knowledge to ensure technical realities and constraints are appropriately incorporated
• Lead(s) of the Development / Implementation Team(s) contribute practical insight on the feasibility, impact, and dependencies of different approaches
• The Organizational Change Management (OCM) representative’s participation is essential in projects involving significant change, especially in processes, and needs to foster the adoption of the methodology and of stakeholder engagement. End-user work processes will probably be modified by the project, so clear built-in approaches are needed to ensure adequate user training and education as needed. In some organizations, OCM will also be responsible for maintaining the process definitions, and later in the project, for organizing and leading the User Acceptance Test

Closing Thoughts – the Challenges and the Road Ahead

From the previous sections, using or adopting a hybrid approach is a logical and attractive option for projects that need to benefit from structure as well as flexibility.

Despite its potential benefits, such as better adaptability, enhanced risk management, and improved communication and collaboration, the challenges of hybrid project management are unfortunately often underestimated:

Complexity and Effort

Combining these two seemingly opposing approaches introduces significant complexity, which can result in confusion and inefficiencies. It may also complicate progress tracking, making it harder to monitor and assess project status effectively.

Striking the right balance and seamlessly managing transitions between methodologies requires substantial project management effort, coordination, and expertise. The initial tailoring and continuous revision and customization of the methodology require time and energy not normally contemplated when using an out-of-the-box methodology.

Balancing Structure and Agility

As a project manager, you must navigate between knowing when to stick to a plan and when to adjust to changing circumstances. Striking the right balance between the approaches can be difficult. The project plan needs to combine both elements: a solid structure that provides clear direction, while allowing flexibility to adapt as the project progresses

Increased Communication Complexity

In Hybrid project management, maintaining effective communication is even more crucial, as teams may operate using different methods and schedules. Ensuring that everyone involved stays informed and up to date on project goals and progress is essential. This can be achieved through regular check-ins, clear communication channels, and transparent updates that help bridge any gaps and keep the project moving forward smoothly.

Additionally, the integration of different project management styles and approaches in a Hybrid environment increases the potential for conflicts and misalignments. The project manager must act as a mediator, resolving these issues to maintain team cohesion and keep the project on track.

Furthermore, project managers often have to engage with a variety of stakeholders, each with their own expectations and reporting requirements. These expectations can differ significantly between traditional Waterfall and Agile methodologies, requiring careful management and clear communication to keep everyone aligned.

In a Hybrid project management environment, the importance of collaboration tools such as dedicated project sites, chat platforms, and document-sharing systems cannot be overstated. These tools serve as central hubs for knowledge availability and sharing, ensuring that all team members have access to the most up-to-date information, resources, and project documentation.

Furthermore, project managers should accompany the team closely, providing guidance, support, and feedback to ensure that the Hybrid methodology is being applied effectively. This active involvement helps resolve any issues that arise quickly and ensures that the team stays aligned with the project’s goals.

The Road Ahead

Hybrid project methodologies hold substantial promise for the future, driven by the increasing complexity and fast-paced evolution of projects across a wide range of industries. Let’s have a look at some of the anticipated evolutions:

• The growth and adoption trend shown earlier in the PMI Pulse of the Profession graph is expected to continue, with significant expansion likely as organizations increasingly recognize the advantages of hybrid approaches over pure Agile or Waterfall

Today, in many cases, hybrid methodologies emerge organically without a formal decision or definition process, simply as teams adapt to project demands in real time. However, this informal adoption can lead to challenges mentioned earlier, as the chosen approach may not be fully thought through or properly structured at the outset.

Moving forward, organizations are expected to place greater emphasis on intentionally merging and customizing to create hybrid frameworks that suit the specific needs of their projects and organizational environments

In the process, hybrid project management methodologies will continue to evolve, drawing on practical experience and adapting to emerging trends. New and innovative frameworks are also expected to emerge, designed to address industry-specific challenges and the growing diversity of project types.

• Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML): These technologies will play a growing role in optimizing resource allocation, forecasting potential risks, improving decision-making, and automating repetitive tasks, enhancing project efficiency and accuracy. Among the tech trends, Predictive Analytics will also play a role in leveraging historical project data and real-time insights to support better planning, risk mitigation, and proactive issue resolution throughout the project lifecycle
• Organizational Change Management (OCM) will become increasingly vital for successful project implementations, especially in navigating the cultural shifts required for hybrid methodologies. OCM will help foster stakeholder buy-in, manage resistance, and ensure that teams are aligned and prepared for the new ways of working introduced by hybrid approaches
• Organizations will need to strengthen their project management capabilities to effectively handle hybrid projects. This will require ongoing investment in training and upskilling programs to ensure that project teams possess the necessary expertise to navigate and execute hybrid methodologies successfully.

In conclusion, hybrid project implementation methodologies are quickly becoming the go-to approach for effective project delivery. Think of it like trying to build a house: You need the solid foundation of traditional methods and the adaptability of modern tools to make sure the construction stays on track. The allure of hybrid methodologies is that they combine the best of both worlds: the structure of Waterfall with the flexibility of Agile. This makes them incredibly well-suited to handling the unpredictable challenges of today’s fast-paced projects.

Organizations that take the time to invest in the right mix of strategy, skills, and technology to customize their unique hybrid approach will be in a strong position to succeed, even as the business world continues to evolve at breakneck speed.

I’ll close with a thought from Henry Ford: “If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.“