Agile and Waterfall in 2024: why businesses in CIS are choosing hybrid project management methodologies

In 2024, more than 55% of CIS project managers have acknowledged that they use hybrid management methodologies, combining elements of Agile and Waterfall. MTS, Gazprom Neft, and Tinkoff have built their own models: product teams work in Agile, while infrastructure projects are managed in a waterfall format. This hybrid helps companies speed up releases while keeping budget and security under control.

1. Agile - this is philosophy project management and product development. It was formulated in 2001 in Agile Manifesto and is based on four values:
2. Results come from people and teamwork, not just processes and tools.
3. The value delivered by the product matters more than perfect documentation.
4. Genuine partnership with the customer is more valuable than endless approvals.
5. The ability to adapt quickly brings more value than rigidly following a plan.

Core Agile principles are Fast development cycles. A sprint lasts 1-4 weeks. - Self-organizing teams. The team makes decisions independently, without constant approval from above. - Incremental delivery of value. Each sprint delivers a working product or part of one. - Customer focus. Results are evaluated through the lens of convenience and value for the end user. - Transparency and feedback. Regular meetings, demos and retrospectives help quickly spot and fix problems.

Agile frameworks. Frameworks are specific approaches that help teams apply Agile principles in practice. They define the way work is organized: how tasks are planned, how long the development cycle lasts, who makes decisions, and how the team evaluates results.

53% of project managers in CISapplyIn Agile, 81% of companies use Scrum as their main framework. When Agile is especially effective Agile is adopted where: - hypotheses must be tested quickly and products launched fast; - a volatile market demands rapid adaptation; - customer expectations keep rising - in fintech, telecom, and e-commerce; - employee engagement matters: Agile increases Team NPS.

Agile works less well where projects are capital-intensive and high-risk - in construction or nuclear energy. There it is more often combined with Waterfall.

Agile and Waterfall use different approaches to product creation. Waterfall is based on a strict sequence of phases, while Agile relies on short iterations with regular feedback. Agile It is effective for building digital products, where it is important to test hypotheses quickly, respond to user needs, and release updates frequently.

It increases team engagement and speeds up time to market for services. Waterfall It is suitable for projects where stability and compliance are critical: construction, manufacturing, and the public sector. Fixed budgets, deadlines, and complete documentation matter here.

Agile-Waterfall Hybrid - Agile-WF, Water-Scrum-Fall or a "two-speed model" is a project management method that combines speedand reliability. Agile teams release new features every 2-3 weeks, while Waterfall processes ensure budget control, security, and regulatory compliance. This speeds up releases without putting infrastructure at risk.

Why the hybrid emerged. In CIS, business operates under double pressure: - Strict regulation. Banks must align projects with the Central Bank, telecom companies must comply with Roskomnadzor requirements, and industrial companies must meet FSTEK and Rostechnadzor requirements. This calls for waterfall procedures. - High competition. Customer-facing services need to be updated every week.

If you delay, customers will go to competitors -60% small and medium-sized companies feel high competition, especially in retail and consulting. Hybrid advantages 1. A balance of speed and stability. Agile makes it possible to release new features every 2-3 weeks, while Waterfall ensures architecture and security are not compromised. 2. Compliance with regulatory requirements. In banking and the public sector, it is impossible to fully abandon waterfall.

3. Resource optimization. Agile teams focus on customer-facing services, while Waterfall teams focus on infrastructure. 4. Risk management. Waterfall milestones help control budget and timelines, while Agile reduces the risk of failed hypotheses. 5. Flexibility across different contexts. In telecom and industry, construction projects are run with waterfall, while digital services are run with Agile.

Formal Agile. Companies say they work in Agile, but in practice teams have no autonomy: tasks come from above, and only managers make decisions. As a result, Agile turns into a set of rituals - standups, sprints - with no value. Consequences: - Loss of team motivation. - Slowdown instead of acceleration - releases go out 3-6 months late. - Change theater. Example: in a number of CIS state-owned corporations launched Agile projects without changing the culture.

Result - teams were following the same waterfall plans, only split into "sprints". Process gap between Agile and Waterfall If Agile and Waterfall teams are not synchronized, the product gets "stuck": some wait months for integrations, while others see their colleagues as chaotic.

Result - delayed releases and rising costs. Consequences: - Agile teams wait months for integrations. - Waterfall teams complain about the "chaos" of their Agile colleagues. - Delays appear at critical stages. Example: in MTS telecom projects, Agile developers quickly released new services, but integration with the network infrastructure was often delayed without release gates.

Opaque dependencies. When one team works in Agile and another in Waterfall, dependencies emerge between them that are hard to track. As a result, the product cannot launch until the waterfall stream completes its phase. Consequences: - Longer waiting times. - More blockers. - Loss of Agile speed benefits. Example: at Sber, before release trains were introduced, the mobile banking teams depended on waterfall integrations, which led to release delays.

Risk of "the worst of both worlds": if a company adopts Agile only halfway and does not keep Waterfall discipline, chaos follows: there is neither speed nor control. This is the worst-case scenario. Consequences: - Loss of trust in the hybrid model. - Project failure. - Higher costs and longer timelines. Example: in industry, companies tried running capital construction projects in sprints - in the end, neither Agile nor Waterfall worked. Cultural resistance to Agile requires a culture of openness, autonomy, and trust.

In large CIS corporations with a strong hierarchy, this is difficult. Consequences: - Resistance from middle managers who do not understand the shift in role from controller to a bridge between teams and strategy. - Conflicts between the "old" and "new" management schools. - Delays in scaling. Example: in banks, old-school employees often see Agile teams as "unmanageable startups".

Solution - launch training programs and coaching.