We began 2025 with the not-so-surprising announcement that the Project Management Institute and Agile Alliance had merged to form the PMI Agile Alliance. With this note I’m seeking to put the matter in perspective so we can move ahead and focus more on results than technique.
I’ve been on all sides of this disconnect since 1984, long before anyone uttered the term “Waterfall.” For anyone trying to see my point of view up front to help your confirmation bias choose whether to read the rest of this note, I don’t identify with any of the sides of this awkward divide. I spent 12 years running a software company. I’m on the side of the shareholder. For public corporations, I’m on the side of the ratepayer.
When push comes to shove, the shareholder doesn’t care about project methodologies, frameworks, philosophies, standards, certifications, approaches, or manifestos. The only question that remains is, “Did you act as a responsible steward of the human and financial resources under your administration?”
The shareholder is both the benefactor and beneficiary of IT’s existence:
- The shareholder, by electing the board to appoint officers in pursuit of a strategic outcome, is the authority driving all spending. IT costs a lot and has a profound strategic impact, and the shareholder is their ultimate benefactor.
- The corporation delivers shareholder value through a strong reliance on IT, making the shareholder the ultimate beneficiary of IT’s value.
When we look at decades of projects through the lens of the shareholder, the false “Waterfall vs. Agile” dichotomy loses potency and makes us look wasteful.
It’s time to refocus on the shareholder.
It’s time to run IT like a business.
