Student Name and Number:

Course Work 1

Module: Managing Projects & Programmes (PS4S16)

Module leader: Natalie Shawley

Module tutor:

Date:

Word Count: 3019

1
 Abstract

This essay highlights the comparison and contrast of agile and traditional project

management approaches in the software industry as well as the advantages and

disadvantages of each approach. To facilitate creativity and change mindset to face

challenges traditional approaches such as the waterfall model is used. However, in order

to major leadership changes, agile methodologies such as Scrum focus more on change

and customer satisfaction. The strategies, advantages and disadvantages of each approach

are based on insights from the cases of companies such as Goodcore and Magora outlined

in this essay. To ensure alignment with project objectives and industry trends companies

must look at their project management approach to ensure ongoing success as it blends

the most effective elements of business processes.

2
Contents
1. Introduction......................................................................................................................3

2. A Comparison of Traditional and Agile Methodologies in the Software Industry..........3

3. Project Success Rates and Adaptability...........................................................................6

4. Leadership Styles: Traditional vs. Agile..........................................................................8

5. Industry Examples: Goodcore and Magora...................................................................10

6. Critique of Effectiveness................................................................................................11

7. Conclusion.....................................................................................................................13

8. References......................................................................................................................15

9. Appendix........................................................................................................................19

3
1. Introduction

In this essay, agile and traditional project management method's effects on the software

industry are compared and examined. Under conventional pipelines traditional

infrastructure is inefficient whether agile approaches to critical change is becoming more

popular nowadays. This essay will examine how these strategies are implemented at two

prominent software companies like Goodcore and Magora, how these methods are using

in each company’s successful projects across the business. Waterfall modelling of

traditional methods is rigid and can lead to delays or low efficiency. In today’s rapidly

growing industry agile methods are better suited to the demands and to market

conditions. This essay attempts to illuminate the perspectives by examining the

company’s project success rates, flexibility, leadership strategies and business outcomes.

The advantages and disadvantages of these approaches and how they affect project

outcomes and differ in leadership styles, this comparative study will also explore. Case

studies will be used to elaborate on how these strategies have been incorporated into the

Goodcore and Magora project management systems. This essay will also highlight the

variables that affect the implementation and success rate in the software industry. It

integrates the latest research and industry trends to provide practical guidance for

managers and organizations to manage software development projects successfully.

2. A Comparison of Traditional and Agile Methodologies in the Software Industry

In traditional project management techniques design, testing and implementation are

performed linearly through the waterfall modelling method. Rather than adjusting to

uncertainty traditional method emphasizes careful planning, pre-planned documentation

4
and proper finishing at the end of each stage but it can be difficult sometimes (Ciric Lalic

et al., 2022). Whereas agile project management techniques offer an adaptive and

incremental approach through Scrum and Kanban systems. Agile processes consist of

potentially different activities called sprints or iterations that can emphasize specific

development cycles (Zasa et al., 2020). The agile development process prioritizes the

interaction of customers and enables frequent, flexible responses as needed. By sharing

responsibility, creating an environment of accountability and collaboration agile method

can encourage teams. One of the key differences between them is how these two

approaches react in adapting to change. According to Leong et al. (2023), to deal with

changes in demand or supply chains competitive change management techniques should

used. Which are often found difficult in traditional approaches. As a result, strict

adherence to the program can be delayed and resistance to trade. Accelerator approaches,

on the other hand, see marketing as an important component of the development process.

During the call, teams are encouraged to embrace the trade-off, make changes quickly,

and use data to formulate new ideas.

In addition, traditional methods sometimes use forecasting and targeted tracking to

achieve sufficient flexibility to meet changing market conditions or customer desires.

Often, they are best to be done in executing project planning with an emphasis on

reducing risk and uncertainty. This approach can foster a sense of security and control or

can inhibit flexibility. However, to balance with everything new agile approaches

emphasize flexibility and responsiveness (Najihi et al., 2022). Agile teams include

ambiguity and uncertainty as well as recognize that requirements can change over time.

Through consistent and incremental fees agile strategies allow teams to react fast to

5
converting desires, market conditions and purchaser remarks. According to Leong et al.,

(2023) groups can use this approach if this new release has been used to screen, examine

and adjust in real time which inspires radical trade and innovation.

Traditional and speedy-tune tactics to chance control are some other essential distinctions

among them. Traditional buying and selling systems generally are seeking for to become

aware of and manipulate dangers in advance with an emphasis on minimizing the

opportunity for mistakes (Gaborov et al., 2021). Risk management is developed early in a

challenge’s life cycle and is often based totally on assumptions and forecasts. However,

in complicated surroundings it can be tough to completely tune all capability threats. To

hazard control agile techniques then again take an incremental and iterative approach.

Agile teams are cognizant of figuring out and fixing problems as they rise as opposed to

looking to count on and manipulate each danger. Gemino et al., (2021) state agile

strategies include complexity and ambiguity allowing teams to react quickly to

converting instances to alter regulations and methods as had to minimize risks and

increase the opportunities.

In conclusion, although traditional methods of project management provide structure and

predictability, it can be difficult to manage uncertainty and change effectively while agile

methods account for change, variation and greater customer cooperation. Making it ideal

for today’s fast-paced software industry and includes risk management to help respond

quickly.

3. Project Success Rates and Adaptability

Research shows that traditional project management methods are characterized by their

6
invariant and sequential structure. That tends to reduce project success rates such as the

waterfall process has a linear flow from requirements collection to delivery practice and

building on past successes at every step. The failure of old methods to deliver change is

one of their major problems (Islam and Ferworn, 2020). Since requirements are often

specified in advance any changes in objectives or project scope may require a detailed

rewrite of the project plan. As a result delays, cost overruns and stakeholder

dissatisfaction can occur because the project fails to keep pace with changing needs or

expectations (Al-Saqqa et al., 2020). However, new accelerator methods offer greater

flexibility and adaptability. Accelerated groups perform smaller activities in short

frequent cycles called sprints or repetitions. This allows for regular feedback from

stakeholders and adjustments to needs or priorities as needed.

According to Kaczorowska, (2020) agile growth strategies allow individuals to quickly

adapt to changing market conditions, emerging prospects and evolving customer

preferences by embracing change as a natural and inevitable part of the process. Agile

methods emphasize teamwork and communication among stakeholders. These are

contributing to a better understanding of project objectives and priorities. This

collaborative approach thereby provides they can make good decisions which in turn

encourages team members to take responsibility for their work. Thus, agile teams are

better able to navigate unfamiliar terrain and solve challenges more effectively leading to

the success of projects. In addition, agile strategies tend to encourage utilitarianism rather

than aiming for greater equity (Munteanu and Dragos, 2021). Agile teams can show real

progress and break down work into smaller and more manageable increments to

continually receive feedback from stakeholders. Based on actual examples this iteration

7
allows for flexibility and learning improvement. Munteanu and Dragos (2021) argue that

it ultimately increases the likelihood of project success.

Agile methodologies enforce transparency and visibility throughout the lifecycle of the

project being a scalable. Agile teams often monitor their progress and inform

stakeholders about their status by using tools such as Kanban (Papadakis and Tsironis,

2020). Stakeholders can make more accurate decisions and reduce the chances of

misunderstandings or conflict by gaining a clear view of project dynamics and the ability

to reduce risks and dependencies. A culture of continuous improvement in which teams

frequently analyze their roles and explore ways of working is encouraged by agile

methodologies just to increase productivity and effectiveness (Žužek et al., 2020). As

well as it encourages a research and development mindset that helps teams adapt to new

best practices and changing circumstances.

Studies have shown that in terms of project success rates and conversions agile

methodologies provide a clear vision of benefits. Agile teams prioritize collaboration,

transparency and flexibility. Enabling execution well and adapting to unexpected

circumstances. Flexibility creates value for stakeholders in the fast and unpredictable

business environment and recognizes the benefits of responsiveness.

4. Leadership Styles: Traditional vs. Agile

Traditional information strategies used are often based on a long-term leadership

philosophy which follows the image of a manager or ultimate decision-maker, although it

can provide clear and directed decisions (Lalmi et al., 2022). Team members also make

the decisions but this can feel powerless or unstructured. On the other hand, agile

8
methods support a specific type of leadership called servant leadership. Focusing on

power, trust and cooperation. Servant leaders function more as facilitators than managers

(Quiña-Mera et al., 2021). Proactive leaders put the needs of their teams and stakeholders

first and give them the tools, resources and support they need to succeed. Active

leadership encourages team members to participate in decision-making, promoting a

sense of responsibility and ownership rather than making decisions on their own. Leading

by example is one of the core principles of servant leadership. Proactive leaders inspire

respect and trust among their team members by practising humility, empathy and

integrity (Albuquerque et al., 2020). Active leadership creates a fun and encouraging

work environment where team members feel appreciated and free to share their thoughts

and ideas while modelling expected behaviour for others.

Additionally, dynamic teams with servant leadership tend to foster a culture of

collaboration and shared accountability. Active leadership encourages open and

transparent communication by asking team members at all levels for their opinions and

insights rather than relying solely on top-down mandates to make decisions with reduced

effort (Quiña-Mera et al., 2021). This collaborative approach gives team members a sense

of ownership and involvement. Servant leadership emphasizes the importance of

continuing education and development. Active leaders embrace failure as an integral part

of learning and encourage experimentation and creativity. Proactive leadership

encourages team members to see mistakes as opportunities for growth and development

rather than as something to punish and destroy the status quo. Serving others is an

important part of servant leadership. Proactive leaders prioritize the needs of their team

members and stakeholders, focusing on their ideas, concerns and goals. According to

9
Trier and Treffers, (2021) proactive leadership creates a welcoming and inclusive work

environment where all employees feel appreciated and happy to deliver their best work

by building strong relationships based on respect and trust in each other.

In conclusion, agile project management styles encourage servant leadership by

emphasizing collaboration, authority and trust while traditional management styles rely

on participative leadership. Agile leadership enslaves leadership strategies and serves to

foster a culture of accountability, creativity and continuous improvement in team

development.

5. Industry Examples: Goodcore and Magora

Both Goodcore and Magora are well-known companies in the fiercely competitive

software sector. They use different business strategies to drive their business and provide

value to their customers. Goodcore is a well-known brand that makes extensive use of

waterfall methods and considers effective policies and documentation to guide its

operations (Alhazmi and Huang, 2020).

Magora is known for being revolutionary when it comes to agile methods such as Scrum.

It focuses on multiple deliverables, iterative development and active customer

engagement (Kuhrmann et al colleagues, 2021). GoodCore remains to traditional

methods as it manages this positively. The waterfall model of traditional approaches has

several steps and every step must be completed before moving on to the next. Detailed

planning, detailed documentation and clearly articulated requirements in this method are

usually required from the start of the project. Designing, testing and implementation are

likely related to the requirements gathering and access phase of the GoodCore strategy.

10
According to Layton et al, (2020) the way project milestones are identified and delivered

in advance gives a sense of control and predictability. However, accounting for all the

variables or uncertainties complexity may occur in the waterfall modelling making it

difficult.

By adopting Scrum methodology Magora’s approach to project management encourages

flexibility and responsiveness. Scrum uses sprints to encourage iterative improvement

and other short iteration periods. With input from participants and regular releases, each

run generates incremental smaller activities (Santos and de Carvalho, 2022). Teams at

Magora are self-organizing, collaborative and constantly improving. The Scrum process

is based on daily status meetings, sprint plan meetings and frequent follow-ups to help

team members communicate and collaborate. Magora's agile approach allows its clients

to quickly transition with ease to provide in the market and add value including

repetitiveness to changing circumstances, customer concerns and immediate needs.

The project results and customer satisfaction levels achieved by Goodcore and Magora

clearly reflect the differences in their management approaches. Goodcore’s traditional

waterfall approach sometimes provides stability and predictability, especially for projects

with unclear goals. However, they find it difficult to adapt to changing customer needs or

market conditions, resulting in delays or scope creep (Brandl et al., 2021). But with an

agile approach, Magora can adapt to uncertainty and change. This leads to continued

delivery and customer investment, which improves product quality and provides strong

edge growth while keeping pace with changing customer expectations It is important to

recognize the cultural impact of strategies resulting from the choices of individual

11
institutions. The gradual decline of Gudcore is a correct function of traditional waterfalls,

where decision-making power is centralized by managers or citizens (Criric lalic et al.,

2022) however, Magora's perspective is flexibility encourages greater participation and a

collaborative approach to work normally in human and altered contexts. of the

psychology of the characters can be influenced upstream , by improving their

participation and overall organizational performance.

In summary, the unique perspectives of Goodcore and Magora are reflected in the

different approaches to delivering software solutions in specific markets Different

approaches emphasize that if a project management style has to be chosen it will suit

business objectives, customer needs and market as important as trends Companies like

Goodcore, Magora have to adapt and react to stay ahead of the curve.

6. Critique of Effectiveness

Sometimes software professionals argue about the efficiency of agile methods and

conventional management methods. While traditional methods are reliable and robust,

they often struggle to complete projects on time and within budget, especially in dynamic

and rapidly changing environments (Zasa et al. 2020). Traditional methods such as

watershed models provide structured systems with defined processes and objectives. This

approach makes projects feel controlled and predictable, making it perfect for those with

specific values and a lot of uncertainty. But it could be difficult for traditional methods to

adapt to unexpected growth or challenges as the project progressed. The linear structure

of the waterfall model can lead to delays and cost overruns because its requirements and

priorities change between projects (Leong et al., 2023). Prioritization strategies that

12
require research in traditional methods can impede work and productivity as well as lead

to unnecessary marketing.

To adapt quickly to changing demands and market trends modern agility methods

emphasize flexibility. Agile development techniques like Scrum and Kanban encourage

frequent delivery, iterative improvement and continuous stakeholder feedback (Najihi et

al., 2022). To refine and prioritize changes based on actual findings or using an iterative

approach teams can increase project success rates and customer satisfaction. According to

Gaborov et al . (2021), establishing a collaborative and flexible culture by emphasizing

team members agile methods can make it easier to do their jobs and contribute ideas.

Team members can more likely to be innovative and involved if they feel valued in

project success.

In terms of effectiveness agile methods also have several shortcomings. Agile projects

can face some challenges related to the availability of different resources or changing

priorities without clearly defined requirements and unclear stakeholder expectations,

(Gemino et al., 2021). Without clearly defined roles and responsibilities agile teams can

be unclear or confusing in organizational nature. Agile methods rely on collaboration,

openness and trust for success. As implementation can be difficult because of resisting

change it is also examine the culture of change in companies. In addition, some

contextual factors such as project size, complexity and corporate culture influence the

effectiveness of project management strategies. Traditional methods can provide greater

consistency and compliance for large projects with mandatory requirements and legal

constraints (Islam and Ferworn, 2020). On the other hand, flexible, scalable agile

13
methods can be useful for sophisticated small businesses whose needs change. Agile

methods may also be well suited to organizations that value continuous testing and

improvement over scalability or risk-free. Whereas the former may be a valuable process

and the latter can be predictable.

In conclusion, agile and traditional project management methods are affected by many

variables such as project size, complexity, company culture etc. Although traditional

methods provide efficiency and reassurance variability and unpredictability can be

difficult to adapt to. Ultimately project management strategies should be selected based

on the specific needs and circumstances of each project and organization.

7. Conclusion

In summary, the differences between traditional and agile processes highlight the

advantages and disadvantages of each approach. While traditional methods promote

stability and they can stifle change with creativity. Agile strategies prioritize customer

needs and change but require strong leadership support and cultural change. Going

forward, companies such as Goodcore and Magora will need to review their project

management systems to ensure they are aligned with project objectives and changing

market conditions. Organizations can improve their project success rates and negotiate

software project challenges through both channels and adapt their strategy to meet the

needs of the project.

14
8. References

Albuquerque, F., Torres, A.S. and Berssaneti, F.T (2020) Lean product development and
agile project management in the construction industry. Revista de Gestão, 27(2),
pp.135-151.

Alhazmi, A. and Huang, S (2020) Survey on differences of requirements engineering for

traditional and agile development processes. 2020 SoutheastCon, pp.1-9.

Al-Saqqa, S., Sawalha, S. and AbdelNabi, H (2020) Agile software development:

Methodologies and trends. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies,
14(11).

Brandl, F.J., Roider, N., Hehl, M. and Reinhart, G (2021) Selecting practices in complex
technical planning projects: A pathway for tailoring agile project management into
the manufacturing industry. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and
Technology, 33, pp.293-305.

Ciric Lalic, D., Lalic, B., Delić, M., Gracanin, D. and Stefanovic, D (2022) How project
management approach impact project success? From traditional to agile.
International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 15(3), pp.494-521.

Gaborov, M., Karuović, D., Kavalic, M., Radosav, D., Milosavljev, D., Stanisaljev, S. and
Bushati, J (2021) Comparative analysis of agile and traditional methodologies in IT
project management. Journal of Applied Technical and Educational Sciences, 11(4),
pp.1-ArtNo.

Gemino, A., Horner Reich, B. and Serrador, P.M (2021) Agile, traditional, and hybrid
approaches to project success: is hybrid a poor second choice?. Project management
journal, 52(2), pp.161-175.

Islam, A.Z. and Ferworn, A (2020) A Comparison between agile and traditional software
development methodologies. Global Journal of Computer Science and Technology,
20(C2), pp.7-42.

15
Kaczorowska, A (2020) Traditional versus agile project management in public sector in
Poland. Zeszyty Naukowe. Organizacja i Zarządzanie/Politechnika Śląska, (149),
pp.287-302.

Kuhrmann, M., Tell, P., Hebig, R., Klünder, J., Münch, J., Linssen, O., Pfahl, D.,
Felderer, M., Prause, C.R., MacDonell, S.G. and Nakatumba-Nabende, J (2021)
What makes agile software development agile?. IEEE transactions on software
engineering, 48(9), pp.3523-3539.

Lalmi, A., Fernandes, G. and Boudemagh, S.S (2022) Synergy between Traditional, Agile
and Lean management approaches in construction projects: bibliometric analysis.
Procedia Computer Science, 196, pp.732-739.

Layton, M.C., Ostermiller, S.J. and Kynaston, D.J (2020) Agile project management for
dummies. John Wiley & Sons.

Leong, J., May Yee, K., Baitsegi, O., Palanisamy, L. and Ramasamy, R.K (2023) Hybrid
project management between traditional software development lifecycle and agile
based product development for future sustainability. Sustainability, 15(2), p.1121.

Munteanu, V.P. and Dragos, P (2021) The case for agile methodologies against traditional
ones in financial software projects. European Journal of Business and Management
Research, 6(1), pp.134-141.

Najihi, S., Elhadi, S., Abdelouahid, R.A. and Marzak, A (2022) Software Testing from an
Agile and Traditional view. Procedia Computer Science, 203, pp.775-782.

Papadakis, E. and Tsironis, L (2020) Towards a hybrid project management framework: A

systematic literature review on traditional, agile and hybrid techniques. The Journal
of Modern Project Management, 8(2).

Quiña-Mera, A., Chamorro Andrade, L., Montaluisa Yugla, J., Chicaiza Angamarca, D.
and Guevara-Vega, C.P (2021) Improving software project management by applying
agile methodologies: a case study. In Applied Technologies: Second International

16
 Conference, ICAT 2020, Quito, Ecuador, December 2–4, 2020, Proceedings 2 (pp.
672-685). Springer International Publishing.

Santos, P.D.O. and de Carvalho, M.M (2022) Exploring the challenges and benefits for
scaling agile project management to large projects: a review. Requirements
engineering, 27(1), pp.117-134.

Trier, K.K. and Treffers, T (2021) May. Agile project management in creative industries:
A systematic literature review and future research directions. In 2021 IEEE
Technology & Engineering Management Conference-Europe (TEMSCON-EUR)
(pp. 1-8). IEEE.

Zasa, F.P., Patrucco, A. and Pellizzoni, E (2020) Managing the hybrid organization: How
can agile and traditional project management coexist?. Research-Technology
Management, 64(1), pp.54-63.

Žužek, T., Gosar, Ž., Kušar, J. and Berlec, T (2020) Adopting agile project management
practices in non-software SMEs: A case study of a Slovenian medium-sized
manufacturing company. Sustainability, 12(21), p.9245.

17
9. Appendix

Appendix 1: Overview of Agile methodologies - A brief overview of Agile

methodologies such as Scrum, Kanban and Lean.

- Explain basic principles and practices.

- Comparison with many agile frameworks.

Appendix 2: Traditional Vs Agile Project Management

- Detailed differences in the traditional waterfall process versus the agile method.

- All benefits and actions.

- Real-world examples of companies using each strategy.

Appendix 3: Case Studies: Goodcore and Magora

- An in-depth analysis of the project management strategies adopted by Goodcore and

Magora.

- Analyze project results, obstacles experienced and lessons learned.

- An analysis of how each company's policy choices influenced their business success and
customer satisfaction levels.

Appendix 4: Industry Reports and Analysis

- Industry studies and research on project management development and practices.

-Statistical data on project success rates, agile methodologies and organizational

challenges.

- Insights from industry experts and thought leaders on the effectiveness of various
project management strategies.

18
Appendix 5: Resources

- Recommendations, information and online resources on project management

techniques.

- Links to relevant websites, blogs and forums for further reading and research.

- Templates and tools for implementing agile methodologies and project management
best practices.

19