Many teams use a linear approach to planning that limits their ability to adapt to an ever-changing world. To drive success, advocate for iterative learning, small bets, and continuous refinement.
Have you heard of the waterfall model for planning? You spend weeks making a plan for next quarter or next year, and then simply execute the plan. Sounds simple enough. Unfortunately, this approach fails to adapt to necessary changes.
Winston Royce documented the waterfall model in 1970. The flow was logical and straightforward to explain. Soon, waterfall planning became deeply ingrained in both software development and broader business planning.
Many read his paper, but few recognized that he explicitly stated the model wouldn’t work in real life. He warned that a purely sequential approach, without iteration, is "risky and invites failure." Unfortunately, that crucial warning was largely ignored, and waterfall planning is still in use decades later.
The Problem with a Linear Approach
The issue isn’t with the individual steps—research, requirements, analysis, design, coding, testing. The flaw lies in failing to learn at each stage, making the entire process inherently rigid and ineffective. Yet, many teams today still follow a similar approach: learn, describe, design, develop, test, and ship. Even in so-called agile environments, many implementations merely shrink the cycle from months to weeks while still adhering to the same linear thinking.
One common agile anti-pattern is the "mini-waterfalls" called sprints—where teams conduct all requirements gathering at the beginning, follow with a full design phase, then development, and finally testing at the end of the sprint. This approach mirrors traditional waterfall but on a smaller scale, preventing true agility and adaptability. Instead of continuously integrating and testing throughout the sprint, teams find themselves stuck in rigid phases, leading to bottlenecks and delays. This is a fundamental misunderstanding of agility, which should prioritize continuous learning and adaptation rather than merely speeding up an existing flawed process.
The ideal process isn’t a line; it’s a wheel. At every stage, we must measure, learn, and adapt. Developing products requires questioning assumptions, validating them with customers (and potential customers), and revising plans accordingly. This iterative cycle allows teams to correct course before investing too heavily in a misguided direction.
The Quartz Open Framework: An Iterative Approach
The Quartz Open Framework, originally created in 2012, was designed to be iterative from the start. It incorporates learning at every step and embraces changes in requirements when they are grounded in customer needs. The model also acknowledges nuance: steps overlap, phases revisit earlier stages as necessary, and work on one aspect often begins before another is fully complete. For example, go-to-market planning starts soon after development begins, rather than waiting until a product is ready to launch. This ensures that teams are not blindsided by commercial realities late in the game.
Learning is central to Quartz
Business strategies evolve as new considerations emerge. Design reviews can reveal the need to validate or reconsider capabilities. Market insights may expose new buyer personas unfamiliar to the existing sales team, forcing a reevaluation of fundamental product decisions. These insights don’t just shape the product; they can reshape entire go-to-market strategies, pricing models, and even business unit priorities.
A Cautionary Tale
Consider the case of a product manager hired to oversee a new product. She was initially tasked with defining the go-to-market strategy, but as she dug deeper, she found significant gaps in the product’s viability. During customer interviews, she discovered that while 12 customers had agreed to pilot the product, none intended to implement it in production—they were merely doing a favor for their salesperson.
Realizing the implications, she gathered cross-functional stakeholders, including sales, engineering, and leadership, to assess the situation. She presented data showing that the technology was too complex for the company’s existing customers, the sales team lacked expertise in selling to the target audience, and implementation hurdles were substantial. After weighing potential pivots and considering long-term support costs, the team ultimately agreed that discontinuation was the best option. Despite the sunk costs, this difficult decision saved the company from years of wasted effort and allowed it to redirect resources toward more viable opportunities.
What’s the worst fate for a new product? Some customers. If a product has no customers, discontinuing it is straightforward. But if it has just a few, the company must sustain it until someone finally decides to shut it down and assist customers in finding an alternative. The sunk-cost fallacy often keeps products alive long after they should have been abandoned, draining resources that could be better spent on more promising initiatives.
The challenge is recognizing that investment does not equate to value—learning from missteps and making tough calls is part of a healthy product strategy.
Waterfall Thinking Beyond Development
Waterfall thinking extends beyond development. Many businesses operate under the illusion of three- to five-year forecasts, despite the inherent uncertainty in their assumptions. Making large bets based on shaky estimates is a dangerous game. These long-term plans often assume stability in markets, customer needs, and competitive landscapes, yet real-world conditions change rapidly.
A prime example is Kodak, which famously stuck to its long-term planning around film photography, despite clear signs that digital cameras were gaining traction. By the time the company attempted to pivot, competitors had already established dominance, leaving Kodak struggling to regain relevance. This failure to adapt demonstrates the dangers of relying on rigid forecasts rather than continuously reassessing and iterating on strategy. Companies that cling to rigid long-term plans often find themselves outpaced by more adaptive competitors.
The Power of Small Bets
A better approach is to make small, informed bets. Assemble a small team to research and prototype an idea for a few weeks. Share it with customers for feedback. If the response is positive, refine the concept for another month or two. Build confidence in both your understanding of the market problem and the proposed solution before committing to a full-scale financial plan. This incremental approach allows businesses to pivot as needed and reduce unnecessary risk. This makes planning responsive to reality rather than wishful thinking.
Think about how you drive a car. On a roadmap, your route appears as a straight line. But in reality, you make constant micro-adjustments—turning as the road curves, rerouting to avoid traffic, stopping for a snack, or driving farther than planned to find better accommodations. Business planning and product development should follow the same adaptive approach. No matter how well you plan a trip, unexpected detours and changes in conditions require on-the-fly adjustments. The same is true for product and business strategy.
The key is incremental investment—small bets, small commitments. Prototype first before building a full product. Develop essential features before tackling everything. Scale in response to demand rather than projections. This approach is not just about reducing risk; it’s about increasing flexibility and responsiveness to opportunities that emerge.
Embrace Adaptability
Avoid the rigidity of waterfall thinking. Plan iteratively, learn continuously, and adapt relentlessly.
The lesson is clear: planning is a continuous process, not a fixed roadmap. Start small, validate assumptions, and adjust based on real-world learning. The businesses and products that thrive are those willing to evolve with the market, not those stubbornly clinging to outdated plans.
So, how can you apply this to your own work? Challenge traditional assumptions, test ideas early, and gather feedback at every stage. The more you integrate learning into your process, the greater your chances of success. Embrace a mindset where change is expected and leveraged as a competitive advantage.
Success isn’t about sticking to a plan—it’s about continuously refining the right plan.
Fewer than 20% of product managers have received any formal training in techniques for managing products. No wonder there's chaos and confusion.
Empower your team with the learning program Fundamentals of Managing Products.