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鈥檓 seeking to put the matter in perspective so we can move ahead and focus more on results than technique.
I鈥檝e been on all sides of this disconnect since 1984, long before anyone uttered the term 鈥淲aterfall.鈥� 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鈥檛 identify with any of the sides of this awkward divide. I spent 12 years running a software company. I鈥檓 on the side of the shareholder. For public corporations, I鈥檓 on the side of the ratepayer.
When push comes to shove, the shareholder doesn鈥檛 care about project methodologies, frameworks, philosophies, standards, certifications, approaches, or manifestos. The only question that remains is, 鈥淒id you act as a responsible steward of the human and financial resources under your administration?鈥�
The shareholder is both the benefactor and beneficiary of IT鈥檚 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鈥檚 value.
When we look at decades of projects through the lens of the shareholder, the false 鈥淲aterfall vs. Agile鈥� dichotomy loses potency and makes us look wasteful.
It鈥檚 time to refocus on the shareholder.
It鈥檚 time to run IT like a business.