Week 14 · learning day 2

Waterfall

Agile Product Development (Part 1) · 45–60 minutes

Today’s outcomes

  • Explain waterfall in the context of agile product development (part 1).
  • Compare a product decision using the source outcome rather than intuition alone.
  • Produce a reusable section of a delivery-method decision.

Source trace

  • W14-O02 Differentiate between waterfall and Agile methodologies.
Videos

Core lesson

Make the choice inspectable

Waterfall matters when it changes a real allocation of attention, money, time, or delivery capacity. Agile reduces uncertainty through small increments and frequent learning.

Start by naming the decision and the uncertainty around it. Separate evidence from assumptions, compare at least one alternative, and state what would make you revise the choice.

The source outcome for today is: Differentiate between waterfall and Agile methodologies.

Decision lens
What decision will waterfall improve, what evidence is sufficient for that decision, and what is the cost of being wrong?

Worked example

Waterfall in practice

For an asynchronous planning workspace, the product manager must compare a choice about waterfall. The team records the target user and outcome, the evidence currently available, the strongest alternative, and the next reversible test. The recommendation is written as a choice with a reason—not as a list of features.

Do the work · 20 minutes

Turn the idea into a decision

  1. Choose a product you know and write the specific decision that waterfall should support.
  2. List two pieces of evidence, two assumptions, and one credible alternative.
  3. Make a recommendation in three sentences and add one condition that would change it.

Save to your portfolio

A delivery-method decision — section: Waterfall

Knowledge check

Answer before opening

What is the decision at the centre of waterfall?

A good answer names an accountable choice, not merely an activity or output.

How should evidence and assumptions be separated?

Label observed facts, interpretations, and untested beliefs explicitly so the next learning step is visible.

What makes the recommendation revisable?

It includes a trigger, threshold, or new evidence that would justify changing course.

What should the portfolio artefact communicate?

The context, considered alternatives, chosen direction, rationale, evidence, and remaining risk.

Scores below 80 appear in your review count.

Spaced review

Reconnect the learning

Reflection

Record your judgement

Confidence

Progress stays in this browser.