Why Applying Waterfall to Power Platform Apps Feels Like Baking a Soufflé with Concrete: A Candid Look at Agile vs. Waterfall

Let me paint you a picture: My first attempt at building a business app with the Waterfall methodology felt a bit like organizing a parade for cats – equal parts chaos and futility. If you’ve ever been tempted to do everything upfront and deliver in one big flourish, stick around. We’re going to unravel the real-world quirks, sneaky pitfalls, and rare exceptions where Waterfall *almost* makes sense for Power Platform apps. Trust me, your project’s future self will thank you.

1. The Temptation of Waterfall: Order vs. Outcome

If you’ve ever managed a software development process, you know the allure of the Waterfall methodology. It promises order in a world that often feels chaotic. For project managers who crave control, Waterfall’s sequential phases offer a sense of predictability that’s hard to resist. You get to plan everything up front, lock down the project development requirements, and move step by step—analysis, design, build, test, deploy. It sounds so clean on paper.

But here’s the catch: real-world projects, especially Power Platform apps, rarely behave as neatly as Waterfall assumes. Requirements shift. Stakeholders change their minds. New possibilities emerge. Still, the temptation remains. Why? Because Waterfall methodology gives you the feeling that, if you just specify enough details and document every scenario, you’ll avoid surprises later. It’s comforting—until it isn’t.

The Seduction of Sequential Phases

The Waterfall approach is all about linear, sequential phases. You finish one phase before moving to the next. For many, this feels like the ultimate in project discipline. You know where you are, what’s next, and (supposedly) how long everything will take. The software development process becomes a checklist.

But research shows that Waterfall is best suited for projects with stable, unchanging requirements. In reality, especially with Power Platform apps, requirements are rarely set in stone. That’s where the trouble starts.

When Documentation Becomes a Dead End

Let me share a personal story. At a UK bank, we spent eighteen months in analysis and documentation. Eighteen months! Meetings, workshops, diagrams, and requirements documents stacked higher than the coffee cups on our desks. And after all that? No software delivered. As one frustrated colleague put it:

"We spent eighteen months in analysis with nothing to show for it except lots of documentation."

It’s not just one-off stories. At a major UK media organization, we were asked to rerun the analysis and design phase three separate times. Why? Because the customer had lost confidence that the process would actually deliver what they needed. The sequential design process became a loop, not a ladder.

Table: Sequential Phases vs. Expected Outcomes in App Delivery

When Requirements Become Handcuffs

You might think that locking up requirements early gives you control. But in practice, it can turn into a set of handcuffs. The more you try to anticipate every scenario, the more likely you are to miss the mark when real needs evolve. And if you think you know everything at the start—do you really? Or are you just hoping the world will stay still long enough for your plan to work?

That’s the paradox of Waterfall methodology: the more you try to control the process through sequential phases and exhaustive documentation, the less control you may actually have when reality changes. And in software development, change is the only constant.

2. Risks of Waterfall: The Hidden Costs No One Budgeted For

When you apply the Waterfall methodology to Power Platform app development, you might feel like you’re baking a soufflé with concrete—everything looks structured at first, but the end result is heavy, rigid, and rarely what you hoped for. The risks of waterfall approach are often underestimated, especially by teams new to business apps or those working in environments that crave predictability. But as research shows, these risks can quietly drain your project of time, money, and value before you even realize what’s happening.

Delayed Feedback and Change Paralysis

One of the most significant risks of the waterfall approach is delayed feedback. In a typical Waterfall project, you spend months—sometimes years—analyzing requirements and documenting every possible scenario. But what happens when stakeholders finally see the software and realize it doesn’t fit their needs? By then, it’s often too late or too expensive to change course. This “change paralysis” locks your project into a rigid path, making it nearly impossible to adapt as new information emerges.

‘Scope Lock’ and Missing Value Until the End

Waterfall methodology is built on the idea of scope lock: you define all project development requirements upfront and stick to them. In theory, this sounds safe. In practice, it means you deliver nothing of value until the very end. If requirements change—and they almost always do in Power Platform projects—your team faces costly rework or, worse, delivers a product that’s already outdated.

Documentation Mountains That Become Obsolete Overnight

Another hidden cost is the mountain of documentation Waterfall demands. You might spend weeks crafting detailed specs, only to find that by the time you start building, half of it is obsolete. Agile project management, by contrast, focuses on just-enough documentation, freeing you to respond to real-world feedback instead of chasing paperwork.

Personal Tangent: When Analysis Clouds, Not Clarifies

Let’s get real for a moment. Neil Benson shares a story about a UK media organization that went through three rounds of requirements analysis. Each cycle added more confusion and less clarity. Instead of moving forward, the team got stuck in a loop—proof that more documentation doesn’t always mean better outcomes.

The Over-Budget ‘Lesson Learned’ Cycle

Perhaps the most frustrating risk of waterfall methodology is learning your lessons too late. You finish the project, realize what went wrong, and vow to do better next time—except the budget’s already blown, and the opportunity to deliver real value has passed. As Neil puts it:

"Do it just once so that you can experience what a risky, miserable way of working waterfall can be."

In the end, the real cost of Waterfall isn’t just money—it’s the missed opportunity to deliver value when it matters most.

3. Agile in the Wild: Messy, Nimble, and Unreasonably Successful

If you’ve ever tried to apply the Waterfall methodology to building Power Platform apps, you might know the feeling: it’s like baking a soufflé with concrete. The process is rigid, every phase is locked in, and any change means starting over. But Agile methodology flips this script, especially when you’re working with Microsoft business apps in regulated industries. Let’s look at how Agile practices—messy, nimble, and surprisingly successful—are changing the game.

Iterative Development Cycles: The Antidote to Scope Rigidity

Traditional Waterfall projects demand that you define every requirement upfront. But real-world needs shift. Agile methodology embraces iterative development cycles, allowing you to adapt as you go. You deliver working software in small increments, gather feedback, and adjust. This approach is especially powerful for Power Platform and Dynamics 365 projects, where requirements often evolve midstream. Research shows Agile practices reduce waste and increase satisfaction by letting you respond to change, not fight it.

How Customer Collaboration Changes the Delivery Game

With Agile, customer collaboration isn’t a checkbox—it’s the engine. You work closely with stakeholders throughout the project, not just at the beginning and end. This ongoing dialogue means you catch misunderstandings early and deliver what users actually need, not just what was written months ago. Studies indicate that this regular feedback loop is a key reason Agile methodology succeeds where Waterfall struggles, especially in complex or regulated environments.

Anecdote: Scrum Rescued the Failed Requirements Document

Here’s a real-world story. At Superware, we were tasked with building Resolve, a complaints management app for Australian financial services organizations. The initial requirements document was a mess—contradictory, incomplete, and already outdated. Instead of forcing the project through a rigid Waterfall process, we switched to Scrum for Microsoft apps. Through short sprints and constant stakeholder input, we not only salvaged the project but achieved full compliance with RG 271, a strict regulatory guide. The app was delivered on time, and the client avoided hefty fines.

Unexpected Finding: Regulated Industries Thrive with Agile

It’s a common myth that regulated industries require Waterfall’s heavy documentation and linear process. But experience—and research—suggests otherwise. Agile methodology, especially when using Scrum for Microsoft apps, is now widely adopted in finance, healthcare, and other compliance-heavy sectors. As one expert put it:

"There's no fundamental reason why your app can't comply with regulations when it was built using an iterative incremental approach."

Agile enables ongoing adaptation and compliance, even in fields traditionally considered Waterfall strongholds.

The Importance of Team Communication and Adaptability

At the heart of Agile practices is team communication. Regular stand-ups, sprint reviews, and retrospectives keep everyone aligned and adaptable. This is crucial when requirements change or compliance needs shift. The ability to pivot quickly—without derailing the entire project—is what makes Agile so effective for Power Platform apps in regulated industries.

4. Myth-Busting: When Waterfall Could Work (But Almost Never Does)

Let’s get real about the Waterfall methodology. You’ve probably heard the classic arguments for when to use Waterfall in project development—especially if you’re building Power Platform apps or similar business solutions. But how often do these scenarios actually play out in the wild? Spoiler: not as often as you might think.

Rare Scenario #1: Predictable, Fixed Requirements

This is the gold standard argument for Waterfall: “We know exactly what we want, nothing will change, let’s plan it all upfront.” Sounds great, right? But as one expert quipped,

"One, predictable requirements. Agree, but more chance of the moon being made out of cheese."

In reality, requirements almost always shift. Even the most straightforward Power Platform project can suddenly face new compliance needs, user feedback, or integration hiccups. Research shows that truly fixed requirements are more myth than reality, especially in today’s fast-moving business environments.

Simple Apps and the Myth of ‘Overkill Process’

Some say Waterfall fits small, simple apps—maybe a basic data tracker or a one-off automation. But here’s the twist: for tiny projects, any formal process might be overkill. You might not need Waterfall or Agile; you just need to build the thing and move on. Ironically, Waterfall can add unnecessary steps even to the simplest tasks, making it harder to adapt if (or when) something changes.

Fixed-Price Contracts and Regulated Industries

Another common argument is that Waterfall suits fixed-price contracts or regulated industries. The logic: you need a clear scope and documentation trail. But studies indicate that even in these scenarios, Waterfall’s rigidity can backfire. Requirements evolve, regulations update, and suddenly your carefully crafted plan is out of date. Agile approaches, with their iterative cycles, often handle these changes with less pain and rework.

Counterpoint: Change Happens—Even in ‘Vanilla’ Projects

Ever seen a project where project development requirements stayed exactly the same from start to finish? If so, you’re in rare company. Most teams, even with the best intentions, encounter shifting priorities, unexpected project dependencies, or new stakeholder demands. Waterfall, by design, struggles to accommodate these shifts without costly delays or scope creep.

The Personal Wild Card: Truly Unchanging Requirements?

Ask yourself—have you ever met a set of requirements that didn’t budge? In practice, it’s almost unheard of. Even in highly controlled environments, surprises happen. That’s why so many teams are moving away from Waterfall and embracing more flexible, adaptive methods.

So, while the textbook says there are six scenarios where Waterfall might make sense—predictable requirements, regulated projects, fixed-price contracts, small/simple builds, no Agile experience, and lots of dependencies—the real world rarely fits the textbook. The exceptions prove the rule: when to use Waterfall is a question with fewer and fewer real answers.

5. Dependencies, Team Topologies, and the Mythical ‘Perfect Plan’

If you’ve ever managed a Power Platform project using Waterfall, you might have noticed something odd about those beautiful Gantt charts. On paper, they make project dependencies look so organized—almost soothing. Every task lines up neatly, dependencies are drawn in crisp arrows, and it all seems to promise a smooth journey from start to finish. But let’s be honest: Gantt charts seem to create dependencies or at least they appear to me to bake them into the plan and set them in hard concrete.

Here’s the reality: project dependencies aren’t magically solved just because you’ve mapped them out in sequence. In fact, when you use Waterfall for Power Platform apps, you risk locking those dependencies in place, making it almost impossible to adapt when things inevitably change. It’s like trying to bake a delicate soufflé with concrete—no matter how carefully you plan, the result is rigid, heavy, and not what anyone wanted.

Why Sequential Planning Falls Short

Waterfall’s linear approach assumes you can predict every twist and turn. But in real-world projects—especially those involving Power Platform’s rapid evolution—requirements shift, integrations get messy, and new dependencies pop up overnight. Gantt charts might make these challenges look manageable, but they don’t help you break bottlenecks or respond to surprises.

Research shows that Agile project management, with its incremental approach and focus on team communication, is far better equipped to handle these complexities. Instead of treating dependencies as immovable, Agile encourages you to break work down into smaller, manageable pieces and tackle bottlenecks as they arise.

Team Topologies: Structuring for Speed

How you organize your teams matters just as much as how you plan your work. Matthew Skelton’s work on team topologies highlights that the right team structure can make or break your ability to handle project dependencies. In Agile environments, teams are often organized to minimize handoffs and maximize collaboration, which helps reduce the impact of dependencies.

Look at how big tech companies like AWS, Nvidia, and Azure operate. They don’t rely on a single, perfect plan. Instead, they scale with agility, using hundreds or even thousands of teams that ship features continuously. Their secret? Continuous collaboration and a willingness to adapt—qualities that Waterfall’s rigid sequencing just can’t match.

Gantt Charts vs. Herding Cats

Here’s a personal analogy: managing dependencies with Gantt charts is a bit like herding cats on a spreadsheet. Everything looks tidy until you try it in real life. Suddenly, the cats (or tasks) have minds of their own, and your neat plan falls apart. Agile project management, on the other hand, accepts the chaos and gives you tools to work with it, not against it.

So, if you’re serious about tackling project dependencies, focus on team communication, incremental delivery, and flexible team topologies. Don’t let the illusion of the ‘perfect plan’ trap you in concrete.

6. Scrum for Microsoft Business Apps: A Practical Guide for the Sane and Adventurous

If you’ve ever tried to manage a Microsoft Power Platform project using the Waterfall methodology, you know it can feel a bit like baking a soufflé with concrete—rigid, stressful, and not exactly built for change. That’s where Scrum for Microsoft apps comes in. The Scrum framework is designed for adaptability, especially in environments where requirements shift and evolve, like business app development on Power Platform or Dynamics 365.

Why Scrum? Real Examples in Power Platform

Scrum isn’t just a buzzword; it’s a proven approach for delivering Microsoft business apps. Teams using Agile practices in Power Platform projects have seen real success. The iterative nature of Scrum means you can deliver working features quickly, gather feedback, and adapt—without waiting for a massive “big bang” launch. This is especially valuable when stakeholders aren’t 100% sure what they want at the start. Research shows that agile methodology supports ongoing customer collaboration and continuous improvement, which is tough to achieve with Waterfall’s rigid phases.

Agile Estimation: Fixing Cost, Flexing Scope

One of the biggest challenges in business app delivery is balancing budget and expectations. With agile estimation under Scrum, you can offer clients a fixed price and timeline—even if the scope isn’t set in stone. As one seasoned consultant put it:

"We deliver apps for a fixed price all the time. Done it for years. We use an agile estimation approach to help the customer forecast how much it'll cost and how long we think it'll take to build all the features they think they want."

This approach gives you control and adaptability. You can prioritize features, adjust as needs change, and still keep costs predictable. Studies indicate that agile estimation is critical for budgeting and timelines, offering flexibility that Waterfall simply can’t match.

Learning by Doing: No Need to Be a Scrum Expert

Here’s a secret: you don’t need to be a certified Scrum Master to start using the Scrum framework for Microsoft apps. Many teams learn as they go, picking up agile practices through hands-on experience, free workshops, and online courses. The Power Platform community is full of resources, from practical guides to interactive webinars. You’ll find that learning by doing is not just acceptable—it’s encouraged.

Explore More: Resources and Workshops

If you’re ready to dive deeper, there are plenty of resources to help you master Scrum for Microsoft apps. Look for free online courses, community workshops, and official Microsoft documentation. These will guide you through agile estimation, sprint planning, and everything you need to deliver successful business apps—without the rigidity of Waterfall holding you back.

7. Finale: Your App Deserves Better Than Concrete Boots – Keep Experimenting!

As you reach the end of this journey through the world of Waterfall vs Agile for Power Platform apps, one thing should be clear: rigid, linear project management is rarely a good fit for the fast-moving, ever-evolving landscape of business app delivery. The stories and lessons from Neil Benson’s experience—months lost in documentation, requirements that shift as soon as users see working software, and the rare “perfectly predictable” project—highlight why Waterfall’s concrete boots can drag your app’s potential straight to the bottom.

Research shows that modern software projects, and the teams behind them, flourish with feedback, not rigid plans. Agile practices like Scrum are all about embracing change, encouraging continuous iteration, and delivering value early and often. You’ve seen how even in regulated industries or fixed-price contracts, Agile offers practical ways to adapt, estimate, and collaborate—without sacrificing compliance or predictability. The reality is simple: requirements are rarely set in stone, and your stakeholders’ needs will evolve as your app takes shape.

But here’s the twist: the real magic happens when you view app delivery as an ongoing experiment. Every sprint, every retrospective, every bit of user feedback is a chance to learn, improve, and unlock new value. This is the “long tail” of project value—unexpected flourishes and innovations that only emerge when you keep learning and adapting. Waterfall, by contrast, often locks you into decisions made before anyone truly understands the problem or the possibilities.

So, what’s the call to action? Don’t just settle for the status quo. Be adventurous. Try new approaches. Mix things up. What if you blended Agile’s adaptability with just enough structure from Waterfall to suit your team’s unique needs? Sometimes, breaking the rules—responsibly—can lead to breakthroughs. Even Neil Benson jokes that you should try Waterfall once, if only to see how risky and inefficient it can be. The point isn’t to follow a methodology blindly, but to keep evolving your process until it fits your team, your project, and your goals.

As you build your next Power Platform app, remember: your app deserves better than concrete boots. It deserves a team that’s curious, adaptable, and always learning. Whether you’re new to Agile vs waterfall project management or a seasoned pro, the best results come from continuous iteration and a willingness to experiment. Or, as Neil puts it:

"Keep experimenting."

In the end, that’s how you—and your apps—stay ahead of the curve.