A Comprehensive Overview of Project Management Methodologies: From Waterfall to SAP Activate

A Comprehensive Overview of Project Management Methodologies: From Waterfall to SAP Activate

In the world of project management, the question "Which methodology is the best?" frequently arises. Especially for SAP project managers and consultants, understanding the differences among methodologies such as Waterfall, Agile, Scrum, Kanban, Lean, Six Sigma, PRINCE2, hybrid approaches, and SAP Activate is crucial. In this article, we aim to eliminate confusion by clearly defining each methodology and providing practical application tips with examples. Thus, we'll gain a rich perspective from both project management and marketing viewpoints, capable of drawing attention on social media as well.

An Overview of Project Management Methodologies

Project methodologies are systematic approaches that provide a roadmap for planning and executing a project. Each methodology introduces different principles regarding how teams visualize workflows, manage workloads, and handle improvements and changes. While some methodologies prioritize flexibility and speed, others emphasize discipline and predictability. Therefore, selecting the right methodology can be crucial for a project's success. For instance, a 2021 PMI report revealed that a quarter of projects in the IT and finance sectors utilized hybrid methodologies, indicating that many organizations prefer blending various approaches depending on the type of project, rather than adhering to a single method.

Below, we will define the most commonly used methodologies individually, examining in which scenarios they excel and the tools that support them. Later in the article, you'll find a table comparing these methodologies based on specific criteria.

Waterfall Model – The Traditional Approach

The Waterfall model is one of the oldest and most traditional project management methodologies. First introduced in a 1970 paper by Winston W. Royce, it takes its name from the way water flows down a waterfall, without turning back. A project is divided into sequential and fixed phases; each phase must be completed before moving on to the next. Typically, it consists of five main stages: requirements gathering, design, development (or implementation), testing (or verification), and maintenance. With this structure, Waterfall clearly defines both the start and end of a project, and the scope and deliverables are clarified upfront.

The greatest advantage of the Waterfall methodology is its predictability and structural clarity. Since the project plan is thoroughly prepared at the beginning, time and budget estimates tend to be more consistent. Waterfall can offer a suitable framework for projects where requirements are fixed and clear from the start, and where changes are not desired, such as in construction or defense industry projects. At the end of each stage, deliverables are reviewed and approved, enabling a clean transition into the next phase. In addition, the methodology requires extensive documentation, which builds a comprehensive knowledge base throughout the project. This ensures that even if a team member leaves, their replacement can integrate quickly thanks to detailed documentation.

On the other hand, Waterfall’s lack of flexibility is its major drawback. If a new requirement emerges or a change is needed after the project has begun, Waterfall struggles to accommodate it, often requiring a return to the beginning or a complete scope redefinition. Because customer feedback is not incorporated until the end, it's only at project completion that one can assess whether the final product truly meets user needs. This poses risks, especially in software projects with high uncertainty and evolving requirements. Indeed, with the rise of modern agile approaches, Waterfall’s rigid structure has been criticized in many circles as "outdated" and stifling to innovation. Nevertheless, in projects with fixed scope, mature technology, and an emphasis on discipline and regulatory compliance rather than creativity—such as medical device development, aircraft software, or government tenders—Waterfall remains a safe and reliable option.

Tracking Projects and Tools in Waterfall: In the Waterfall model, the workflow is typically visualized through a Gantt chart or a similar project schedule. Each phase's start and end dates, along with their dependencies, are illustrated on a timeline. Classic tools such as the Critical Path Method (CPM) and PERT diagrams are frequently used to manage duration and sequential dependencies in Waterfall projects. Workload limitations are generally enforced naturally by the timeline—only tasks from the current phase are executed, and multiple major tasks are not pursued simultaneously. However, Waterfall does not emphasize concepts like parallel task execution or WIP (Work in Progress) limits; the primary focus is on strictly following the predefined plan. Continuous improvement is not an intrinsic part of the methodology during the project itself; instead, it takes place afterward through “lessons learned” sessions aimed at enhancing future projects. In other words, Waterfall lacks a built-in cyclical improvement mechanism.

In summary, the Waterfall methodology reflects a “plan and execute” philosophy. In the SAP world, earlier methodologies such as ASAP (Accelerated SAP) largely followed the Waterfall approach—once the scope and design were defined at the beginning, the entire system was built, followed by testing and go-live. Although more agile approaches are favored today, Waterfall-style phased planning can still be appropriate in scoped S/4HANA transformation projects or SAP initiatives that require step-by-step approvals due to regulatory obligations.

Agile Methodology – Flexibility and Speed

The Agile approach emerged as a response to the rigidity of the Waterfall model, placing adaptability to change at the center of project management philosophy. The famous Agile Manifesto, published in 2001, introduced four core values and twelve principles, emphasizing individuals and interactions, working software, customer collaboration, and responsiveness to change. Agile should not be viewed as a single method, but rather as a set of principles and an umbrella concept. Frameworks such as Scrum, Kanban, XP (Extreme Programming), and Crystal embody Agile principles in different ways.

At the heart of Agile project management lies the idea of delivering work iteratively and incrementally, rather than in one large final delivery based on a fixed plan. This means the project is broken into short cycles, and each cycle produces a working piece of the product. As a result, the team receives feedback from the customer at the end of each cycle and adjusts the course of the next cycle accordingly. According to Atlassian, “Agile project management is an iterative approach that focuses on continuous delivery and customer feedback.” This highlights one of Agile’s greatest advantages: rapid adaptation to change and customer-centricity. Even if requirements shift or market conditions evolve during the project, Agile teams can easily adjust thanks to their short planning horizons and frequent course corrections.

Another practical benefit of the Agile approach is its ability to boost team motivation and productivity. Agile teams are typically small, cross-functional, and self-organizing. Rather than micromanagement, every individual is encouraged to actively participate and take ownership. Through regular “retrospective” meetings, teams continuously strive to improve how they work—after all, continuous improvement is a cornerstone of Agile culture. Borrowed from Lean philosophy, the concept of Kaizen (continuous improvement) is also applicable here: after each iteration, processes are reviewed and adjustments are planned for the next cycle.

Agile methodologies often use boards and task cards to visualize workflow. For example, a Scrum or Kanban board typically includes columns like “To Do,” “In Progress,” and “Done,” allowing team members to track work items (such as user stories or tasks) visually on the board. This makes it possible to monitor the current status of the project at a glance. Unlike Waterfall, workload management in Agile is handled more dynamically; priorities are continuously reassessed. In Agile approaches like Kanban, a Work in Progress (WIP) limit is often applied to restrict the number of tasks being worked on simultaneously. This helps prevent context switching and inefficiency, enabling teams to focus on completing one task before moving on to the next.

Two of the most widely used Agile frameworks—Scrum and Kanban—will be discussed in detail below. However, Agile is not limited to these. Each team can tailor its own Agile process based on its specific dynamics, even blending Scrum and Kanban if needed. What matters most is embracing a mindset that focuses on delivering value to the customer and viewing change not as a threat but as an opportunity.

In the context of SAP projects, we’ve seen that SAP has increasingly encouraged Agile-aligned approaches in recent years, especially through its Activate methodology. For instance, instead of writing a large design document and spending months on development in an S/4HANA project, conducting rapid “Fit-to-Standard” workshops to gather immediate feedback and configuring the system in short sprints reflects the essence of Agile thinking.

Scrum – The Framework for Agile Iterations

Scrum is one of the most popular and widely adopted frameworks of the Agile philosophy. Although often referred to as a methodology, Scrum is a lightweight framework that defines specific roles, events, and artifacts to help teams manage complex projects by breaking them down into manageable pieces. The term “Scrum” is inspired by the rugby formation, emphasizing the importance of synchronized team effort.

In Scrum, work is divided into time-boxed iterations called “sprints,” which typically last between 1 to 4 weeks (with 2 weeks being the most common). At the beginning of each sprint, the team holds a Sprint Planning meeting to define the work to be completed during that sprint and creates a Sprint Backlog. Throughout the sprint, the team conducts short daily meetings known as Daily Scrums to review progress and identify any obstacles. At the end of the sprint, the resulting product increment is presented to stakeholders during the Sprint Review, and feedback is gathered. Immediately afterward, the team holds a Sprint Retrospective to reflect on their work process and identify improvements. This cycle repeats every sprint, enabling continuous value delivery through working product increments.

Scrum defines three key roles: the Product Owner, the Development Team, and the Scrum Master. The Product Owner is responsible for maximizing the value of the product and acts as the voice of the customer, prioritizing the work based on business needs. The Development Team consists of 3 to 9 cross-functional members (developers, analysts, testers, etc.) who collaborate to achieve the sprint goals. The Scrum Master serves as the team's coach, ensuring Scrum practices are correctly understood and followed, removing impediments, and facilitating productive teamwork. Clearly defined roles in Scrum enhance transparency and accountability, reducing confusion and fostering effective collaboration.

Another core element of Scrum is the Product Backlog—a prioritized list of all work required for the product, including features, enhancements, bug fixes, and more. Maintained and continuously refined by the Product Owner, the backlog ensures adaptability throughout the project. At the start of each sprint, the team pulls top-priority items from the backlog to form the Sprint Backlog. This mechanism enables flexibility—if requirements change, the updated backlog can guide upcoming sprints, which lies at the heart of Scrum’s adaptability to change.

Scrum teams typically visualize their work using a Scrum board or a Kanban board. Each user story or task is represented as a card and moves across columns such as “To Do,” “In Progress,” and “Done” during the sprint. This board provides real-time visibility into the team's progress. Additionally, teams use Burndown Charts to track the amount of work remaining over time. Ideally, the chart reaches zero by the end of the sprint, indicating that all planned work is complete. If not, the discrepancy becomes a discussion point during the Sprint Retrospective: Was it a planning error? Were there unexpected blockers? These reflections support continuous improvement.

When it comes to advantages, Scrum’s ability to manage risk in projects with uncertain requirements stands out. By delivering a working increment at the end of each sprint, teams ensure that—even if priorities shift mid-project—there is always usable output. Customer satisfaction also tends to be higher, since stakeholders (Product Owners or business reps) are directly involved and provide feedback during every iteration. Team motivation increases as well, thanks to the self-managed and empowered nature of Scrum teams. However, Scrum can feel unfamiliar at first, especially due to its regular sprint meetings (e.g., planning, daily scrums, reviews, retrospectives). Teams may express concerns like “There are too many meetings” or “Where are the documents?” since Scrum intentionally minimizes bureaucracy. The focus is on delivering value, not generating documentation. That’s why organizations with rigid hierarchies or teams lacking decision-making authority may struggle to adopt Scrum unless the transition is well-managed.

Scrum in SAP Projects: Traditional SAP ERP projects were mostly executed in a Waterfall manner. However, Scrum has become increasingly common in modern SAP initiatives. For instance, in an SAP S/4HANA development project, teams can structure their configuration and development work into 2–3 week sprints, ending each with a demo for business users. SAP’s Activate methodology aligns with this approach by recommending sprint-based development during the Realize phase. This allows organizations to stay agile and maintain control, even in large-scale ERP implementations.

For example, let’s assume the Production Planning (PP) module of SAP is being implemented for a manufacturing company. Instead of spending months on analysis and design followed by a full system build—as is typical in Waterfall—you could, with Scrum, deploy the core production planning functions in a near-live environment during the first sprint and test them with users. In the second sprint, you might add detailed planning features and gather feedback again. By progressing incrementally in this way, you not only minimize surprises at the end of the project but also help users gradually build familiarity with the system. These practical benefits are what make Scrum increasingly appealing within the SAP ecosystem.

Kanban – Visual Workflow Management

Kanban is another Agile methodology with roots in manufacturing that has been widely adopted across various fields, including software development. In Japanese, the word “kanban” means signboard or visual card. It was first introduced within Toyota’s Production System in the 1950s. Inspired by the shelf-stocking system used in supermarkets, Toyota developed a card-based approach in which a new part would only be produced and added when an existing one was used. This system implemented the Just-in-Time (JIT) and pull principles in manufacturing, production was triggered by demand, minimizing overproduction and excess inventory. From this foundation, the Kanban method evolved into a broader planning and workflow system aimed at balancing workloads and reducing waste across business processes.

In modern project and task management, the first thing that comes to mind when we talk about Kanban is the Kanban board. This visual tool represents ongoing tasks and their statuses. At its simplest, the board is divided into vertical columns such as “To Do,” “In Progress,” and “Done.” Team members write their tasks on cards and move them across columns as the work progresses. This makes it easy for the entire team and stakeholders to understand the current workload at a glance. The core idea behind Kanban is to visualize the workflow and use a pull-based system, where work is undertaken according to team capacity. This allows bottlenecks to be identified quickly and enhances overall efficiency.

Unlike Scrum, Kanban does not operate on fixed timeboxes (sprints). The workflow is continuous and fluid: each task is taken up, completed, and replaced by a new one as capacity allows. To maintain balance, Kanban introduces a key concept—WIP (Work-In-Progress) limits, which cap the number of tasks allowed in each column at any given time. For example, if the “In Progress” column has a WIP limit of 3, the team cannot start a fourth task until at least one of the current tasks is completed and moved forward. This not only prevents overload but also highlights bottlenecks, helping teams stay within their capacity. In essence, it reinforces the principle of “less work, faster flow.”

One of the greatest strengths of Kanban is how easy it is to implement. Rather than requiring a radical overhaul, Kanban offers an evolutionary approach that can be layered onto your existing workflow. Whatever process you’re currently following, Kanban starts by visualizing it—this aligns with one of its four core principles: “Start with what you’re doing now.” From there, you make gradual improvements—such as introducing WIP limits or clarifying workflow steps—to smooth out the process. Because of this non-disruptive nature, Kanban typically faces little resistance from teams. It respects existing roles and structures while making them more transparent. Another key Kanban principle is continuous improvement and shared leadership. Every team member is encouraged to contribute ideas and take initiative to enhance the workflow—an approach that closely mirrors the Kaizen culture of Lean thinking.

Today, software teams frequently use Kanban for IT operations, maintenance, and support tasks. For example, a technical support team might manage incoming requests as a backlog and handle them sequentially on a Kanban board. Each support ticket moves across columns like “New – Assigned – In Progress – Testing – Closed,” allowing the team to manage priorities and bottlenecks transparently. Urgent issues are instantly visible, everyone knows who is working on what, and no task falls through the cracks.

In SAP projects, the Kanban approach is especially prevalent in SAP Support Centers or DevOps teams. For instance, an SAP application maintenance team can manage user requests—such as enhancement or bug fix tickets—through a Kanban system. Requests are added to the backlog based on priority, and team members pull tasks from the top as they become available. This makes it easier to monitor Service Level Agreements (SLAs) and ensure timely delivery. In some cases, a hybrid model called Scrumban is used, combining Scrum and Kanban. Here, sprint planning and goals are retained from Scrum, while Kanban is used to track in-sprint task flow. This approach offers the structure of Scrum with the flexibility of Kanban, making it ideal for teams balancing planned work with unpredictable tasks.

Kanban Tools and Visuals: Implementing Kanban can be as simple as using a physical board with sticky notes. Many teams use whiteboards mounted on walls as their Kanban boards. In digital environments, tools like Trello, Jira (Kanban module), and Asana offer virtual Kanban boards that replicate this visual workflow. These platforms also provide access to analytics tools such as Cumulative Flow Diagrams (CFD), which help measure the flow rate of work. A CFD shows how many tasks are in the backlog, in progress, or completed over time—highlighting potential bottlenecks in the workflow. Additional metrics such as lead time (the time from a task entering the system to its completion) and cycle time (the time a task is actively worked on) offer critical insights for Kanban’s continuous improvement philosophy. These metrics help teams identify inefficiencies and make informed process improvements.

In conclusion, Kanban is built around the principles of maintaining flow, visualizing bottlenecks, and managing work through a pull system without exceeding team capacity. Rather than being a strict project management method, Kanban can also be viewed as a work management system. Its flexible and visual nature allows it to be used standalone or in combination with iterative methods like Scrum. What matters most is the ability to project a real-time snapshot of the team’s work onto a screen—or a wall—and that’s exactly what Kanban makes possible.

Lean Methodology – The Art of Eliminating Waste

Lean methodology is a management philosophy rooted in the Toyota Production System, centered on eliminating waste, continuous improvement, and respect for people. The term “Lean” was introduced into the literature in 1988 by John Krafcik to describe Toyota’s production techniques. However, Lean principles were developed in Japan starting in the 1940s and spread to the West through Womack and Jones’s book Lean Thinking in the 1990s. Although Lean originated in manufacturing, it is now widely applied in fields such as software development, startup management, and healthcare.

The Lean philosophy encourages organizations to focus on three core elements: purpose (the goal of creating value), process (the value creation stream), and people. An organization should aim to solve the customer’s problem as effectively as possible (purpose), eliminate non-value-adding steps in doing so (process), and trust and empower its employees to contribute ideas and improvements along the way (people). From this perspective, Lean represents a company culture and mindset.

Two core principles of Lean are frequently emphasized: respect for people and continuous improvement. Respect for people means believing that those who do the work (frontline employees) are capable of improving the processes themselves—it’s about encouraging their participation. Continuous improvement (Kaizen) is the pursuit of better outcomes through small, incremental steps taken every day. In Lean environments, employees are expected not only to perform their tasks but also to improve how those tasks are done. There is a strong culture of learning from mistakes and maintaining transparency.

At the heart of Lean practices lies the elimination of waste (muda). Toyota identified seven types of non-value-adding activities in production: overproduction, unnecessary transportation, excess inventory, unnecessary motion, defects, overprocessing, and waiting. Each of these forms of waste is scrutinized at every process step and minimized as much as possible. For instance, in software development, “waiting” might refer to delays during approval processes, while “overprocessing” could mean building features the customer will never use. To detect such wastes, Lean uses tools like Value Stream Mapping, where an end-to-end process map is created and each step is evaluated for its contribution to customer value. Steps that do not add value are either improved or removed.

In the realm of software development, Lean principles were concretely defined by Mary and Tom Poppendieck in their 2003 book Lean Software Development. They summarized seven core Lean principles for software as follows: Eliminate Waste, Build Quality In, Create Knowledge, Defer Commitment, Deliver Fast, Respect People, Optimize the Whole. These principles significantly influenced the shaping of the Agile Manifesto—indeed, Agile has its roots in Lean thinking.

Since Lean is more of a management philosophy than a step-by-step project methodology, it does not define traditional phases or detailed procedures. Instead, it maintains a consistent set of core principles that are adapted to the specific context of each industry. For example, Kanban cards and Andon lights are Lean tools in manufacturing, whereas Continuous Integration and Kanban boards are Lean-inspired tools in software development. When applied in a project context, Lean typically adopts the PDCA cycle (Plan–Do–Check–Act). This means the project proceeds through short learning loops, constantly experimenting, validating, and adjusting as needed—focusing on incremental improvement and adaptability throughout the lifecycle.

Lean offers high flexibility in implementation because it does not prescribe a rigid framework—instead, it adapts to the existing environment. For example, some companies use the Lean Startup methodology to develop products through rapid experimentation and iterative pivots based on customer feedback. The core Lean idea here—waste elimination—is aimed at preventing major inefficiencies, such as “fully developing a product that no one wants” only to realize it too late. To avoid this, a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) is quickly launched to the market, feedback is gathered, and the product evolves accordingly. This loop is essentially a reflection of Lean’s continuous improvement mindset applied to the field of marketing and product development.

In SAP projects, the Lean approach is most often seen in process improvement and quality management. For instance, an SAP support team can apply Lean principles to optimize ITIL processes by eliminating unnecessary approval steps, resolving recurring incidents permanently, and streamlining the support workflow. Similarly, frameworks like Lean Six Sigma are used within SAP environments, combining Lean’s focus on waste elimination with Six Sigma’s data-driven defect reduction.

In summary, Lean methodology is about managing a project or process in the most efficient, error-free, and value-driven way possible. It instills the motto: “More value with fewer resources.” In doing so, it empowers teams without losing sight of the fact that people are the most valuable asset. Among project management methodologies, Lean stands out as more of a business philosophy than a structured method. Yet, it is the invisible hand behind many modern project management techniques, influencing them at their core with its principles of continuous improvement, respect for people, and value creation.

Six Sigma – Data-Driven Process Improvement

Six Sigma, developed at Motorola in the 1980s, is a data-driven improvement methodology aimed at reducing defects in processes to near zero. The term “Six Sigma” refers to a statistical benchmark where 99.99966% of process outputs are defect-free—meaning no more than 3.4 defects per million opportunities. Originally designed to dramatically improve manufacturing quality and reduce variation, Six Sigma gained widespread popularity in the 1990s when adopted aggressively by corporations like General Electric. Over time, its application expanded beyond manufacturing into a wide range of industries.

At the core of Six Sigma lies a five-phase problem-solving cycle known as DMAIC: Define (the problem and project goals), Measure (current process performance), Analyze (data to identify root causes of defects), Improve (the process by developing and implementing solutions), Control (the improved process to sustain gains). This framework can be seen as a management adaptation of the scientific method, with data-driven decision-making at its heart.

Six Sigma also introduces a structured competency and project system within organizations. It certifies individuals as Green Belts, Black Belts, and higher, training them to lead statistical problem-solving initiatives. Six Sigma projects are typically managed by these certified professionals, supported by executive sponsors, and are aligned with financial impact goals from the start. In this way, Six Sigma functions as a formal, programmatic improvement strategy embedded within the organization.

A critical point to note is that Six Sigma is not an independent project management methodology. It focuses on improving existing processes and generally operates within a pre-established project framework. In other words, Six Sigma doesn’t define what will be done or who will do it; rather, it outlines how to analyze a problem and find a solution. As a result, organizations commonly use Six Sigma in conjunction with methodologies like Waterfall or Agile. For example, a manufacturing process improvement project may be planned using the Waterfall model. At the same time, Six Sigma techniques—such as Ishikawa diagrams, ANOVA, or hypothesis testing—are applied during the solution development phase. This dual approach forms the foundation of the Lean Six Sigma concept: Lean aims to reduce waste, while Six Sigma aims to reduce process variation.

One of Six Sigma’s strongest attributes is its ability to deliver measurable and concrete outcomes. Objectives are often tied to metrics like financial gains or increases in customer satisfaction, and these are validated at the end of the project. Because Six Sigma relies on rigorous data collection and analysis, decisions are based on hypotheses and statistical evidence. For instance, if a bank identifies that its loan approval process is taking too long, it may launch a Six Sigma project to reduce turnaround time. The project team measures each step of the process, identifies where delays occur (e.g., external credit score system lag), and implements targeted improvements. As a result, the average processing time may be reduced by 50%, and the project concludes successfully—with control mechanisms (e.g., system alerts or performance KPIs) added to ensure sustainability.

Six Sigma Tools and Application Areas: When people think of Six Sigma, they often associate it with tools like: Statistical Process Control (SPC), Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA), Design of Experiments (DOE). Indeed, Six Sigma Black Belts are trained to use these tools effectively in problem-solving. Having originated in manufacturing, Six Sigma is particularly effective in repeatable, data-rich processes. Industries such as automotive, electronics, and aerospace have benefited extensively from its implementation. In the services sector (e.g., banking, telecommunications), it has been used to standardize processes and reduce errors. For example, a call center might apply Six Sigma to analyze factors affecting customer satisfaction and implement targeted improvements accordingly.

From an SAP perspective, Six Sigma is not a software development methodology per se. However, organizations using SAP can undertake Six Sigma projects to improve process performance. For example, companies may analyze SAP data within warehouse management processes to reduce inventory error rates, or examine quality data from SAP systems on the production line to lower the rate of defective products. In such cases, Six Sigma provides the analytical and methodological framework, while SAP serves as the data source. SAP’s Analytics and Process Mining tools are particularly valuable during the Measure and Analyze phases of Six Sigma, helping teams identify root causes with real-time and historical process data. In SAP implementation projects, Six Sigma thinking also aligns with efforts to reduce process variation, such as eliminating unnecessary differences in how the same process is executed across different departments or locations. This ensures greater standardization and quality consistency—key objectives in both SAP rollouts and Six Sigma initiatives.

In summary, Six Sigma is a data- and statistics-driven methodology focused on improving existing processes. When combined with Lean, it not only eliminates inefficient steps but also minimizes defects in the remaining ones. While it is not a project management framework in itself, it is a powerful toolkit for sustaining project success over time. The ultimate goal of Six Sigma is to make quality a cultural habit within the organization. Importantly, Six Sigma is also a cultural transformation—it fosters a mindset that trusts in data, views mistakes as learning opportunities, and systematically pursues excellence through continuous improvement.

PRINCE2 – Controlled Project Environments

PRINCE2, short for “Projects IN Controlled Environments,” is a structured project management methodology. It was developed in 1996 through a revision of the original PRINCE method by the UK government and has since become a widely adopted standard around the world. PRINCE2 is especially favored in public sector projects and large-scale corporate initiatives, thanks to its comprehensive control mechanisms and detailed process framework that offer structure and traceability in complex environments.

The core philosophy of PRINCE2 is to divide a project into controlled and manageable segments. The project is broken down into clearly defined stages, with a checkpoint at the end of each stage. A Project Board, composed of senior stakeholders, reviews the project’s status at each checkpoint and decides whether it should proceed to the next stage. This ensures that the business justification defined at the start of the project remains valid and that the project is progressing toward its intended benefits. If the project is no longer aligned with its business case, PRINCE2 allows—indeed, encourages—termination as a rational and responsible decision. This reflects PRINCE2’s “continued business justification” principle, which asserts that a project must be stopped if it no longer delivers value.

PRINCE2 is defined around 7 principles, 7 themes, and 7 processes. These seven principles are fundamental rules that must be followed for a project to be truly PRINCE2-compliant. They include: “Continued business justification”, “Learn from experience”, “Defined roles and responsibilities”, “Manage by stages”, “Manage by exception”, “Focus on products”, “Tailor to suit the project environment”. As these principles suggest, PRINCE2 is also designed with flexibility in mind, making it adaptable to projects of any size or industry (as emphasized by the Tailoring principle). The 7 themes represent the key aspects of project management that must be continuously addressed throughout the project lifecycle (Business Case, Organization, Quality, Risk, Plans, Change, Progress). Each theme includes specific requirements for documentation and governance. For instance, the Risk Theme outlines how risk management must be handled from start to finish and requires that a risk register be maintained throughout the project.

PRINCE2’s process model divides the project into structured stages, including initiation, direction, and stage boundaries. The typical lifecycle of a PRINCE2 project may flow as follows: “Starting Up a Project,” a project executive is appointed, and initial feasibility is assessed. “Initiating a Project,” a detailed Project Initiation Documentation (PID) is created, covering the business case, scope, plan, risks, organization structure, and more. “Directing a Project – The Project Board” reviews and authorizes each stage and makes key decisions. “Controlling a Stage – The Project Manager” handles daily management, progress reporting, and issue handling. “Managing Product Delivery” Teams execute the work packages and deliver project outputs. “Managing a Stage Boundary,” each stage ends with a review and planning for the next. “Closing a Project” final outputs are reviewed, lessons learned are documented, and the project is formally closed.

This structure enables tight control and governance over the project. Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined—for example, roles such as Project Manager, Project Executive, Senior User, and Senior Supplier form part of the governance model. PRINCE2 also emphasizes comprehensive documentation; every aspect of the project is recorded. For change requests, a formal Change Control process is in place. In summary, PRINCE2 provides all the necessary tools to minimize uncertainty and ensure accountability, making it especially effective for complex, high-stakes projects where structure, control, and traceability are essential.

The key advantage of PRINCE2 lies in its structured and controlled framework, which enhances both predictability and accountability. This makes it particularly well-suited for public sector projects, where transparency and governance are paramount. In addition, comprehensive documentation allows projects to continue seamlessly even if team members change, helping establish institutional memory. With its systematic approach to risk and quality management, PRINCE2 reduces the likelihood of unexpected risks or quality issues.

On the downside, PRINCE2 can be less agile and more bureaucratic. For smaller projects or those requiring rapid delivery, the methodology may feel overly rigid—each step often demands forms, reports, and formal approvals. In response to this limitation, the question of how to align PRINCE2 with Agile has gained traction. Axelos has developed PRINCE2 Agile, a hybrid framework that retains PRINCE2’s governance structure while integrating Agile delivery practices like Scrum and Kanban. This approach aims to achieve both control and flexibility.

PRINCE2 in SAP Projects: In the SAP ecosystem, particularly in Europe, some implementation projects have been managed using PRINCE2. It can be especially helpful in large-scale, multi-module, multi-stakeholder SAP initiatives, where central governance and structured reporting are critical. Consider, for example, a nationwide SAP rollout project with dozens of sub-projects—PRINCE2's staged control approach allows each sub-project to report and receive approval at key milestones. Risks can be escalated and managed at a central level. However, since PRINCE2 is traditionally aligned with Waterfall-style planning, it may initially seem incompatible with SAP Activate, which is more Agile-oriented. That said, PRINCE2’s “tailoring” principle allows for adaptation: SAP Activate phases can be mapped to PRINCE2 stages, and governance checkpoints can be implemented at the end of each phase. In practice, some organizations manage SAP projects through PRINCE2–Agile hybrids, combining the best of both worlds—structured governance with iterative delivery.

In summary, PRINCE2 is a solid methodology for organizations looking to formalize and control their project management processes. Its widespread adoption is supported by a well-established certification system and globally recognized terminology. If your project requires clearly defined stages, strict change control, and executive oversight, PRINCE2 provides a robust framework. However, in fast-paced or highly dynamic environments, it may need to be complemented with Agile practices to ensure responsiveness and adaptability.

Hybrid Approaches – The Best of Both Worlds?

In project management, a hybrid approach refers to managing a project by combining elements from multiple methodologies simultaneously—most commonly a mix of Waterfall and Agile practices. Rather than adhering strictly to the limitations of a single method, the hybrid model aims to apply the most suitable approach to different parts of a project. While hybrid project management has seen a rapid rise in popularity in recent years, it's not entirely new in theory—many large organizations have long maintained formal Waterfall project plans while development teams informally adopted iterative practices. Today, this blend has a name and growing acceptance.

The main driver behind hybrid approaches is the simple truth that projects are not one-size-fits-all. Some parts of a project may involve high uncertainty and require exploration, while others can be clearly defined and sequentially planned. For instance, in a software project for a bank, the user interface might demand innovation (and thus benefit from Agile-style rapid prototyping and user testing), whereas backend integration with the bank’s legacy systems might require strict compliance and zero surprises—best handled through a Waterfall-style plan with detailed testing and documentation. In such scenarios, the hybrid model provides the flexibility to handle both types of work appropriately. Predictable components are managed with Waterfall discipline, while uncertain or evolving components are tackled with Agile flexibility.

In a typical hybrid environment, high-level planning is often done in a Waterfall fashion. Project start and end dates, major deliverables, and overarching phases are laid out upfront. However, execution within those phases—particularly for development teams—is often carried out using Agile methods. A Toptal expert puts it this way: “A True hybrid combines predictive approaches for well-understood work with Agile practices for uncertain, evolving components. In a hybrid model, Waterfall gives structure to the predictable parts, while Agile enables iterative progress where clarity is still emerging.” For example, in a company-wide software rollout project, tasks such as infrastructure setup and user training may follow a sequential Waterfall plan, while the development team executes in Scrum sprints, iterating and demoing features for feedback. This dual structure allows teams to benefit from the rigor of traditional planning and the adaptability of Agile delivery, ultimately increasing project responsiveness without sacrificing control.

Let’s consider a concrete example of a hybrid model in action: suppose an automotive company is developing a new production planning module on SAP. The legal compliance and reporting aspects of the project are bound by strict regulations—making them well-suited for a Waterfall approach, where all requirements are defined upfront, and development and testing are carefully scheduled. However, the user interface (UI) and user experience (UX) components are more uncertain. These may require several design iterations and user feedback loops, making an Agile approach more appropriate. When managed as a hybrid project, the project manager coordinates both streams under a unified plan. For instance, the UI team may use a Kanban board to manage their tasks and deliver prototypes every two weeks. Meanwhile, the backend development team follows a traditional Gantt chart schedule. At defined integration points—such as a monthly integrated testing phase specified in the Waterfall plan—the two teams synchronize their outputs. In this way, the hybrid model bridges flexibility and control, allowing each part of the project to be managed most effectively.

Hybrid project management requires the PM to have a wide-ranging skill set, capable of navigating both predictive and adaptive workflows without conflict. One part of the team might participate in daily stand-ups, while another submits weekly progress reports—and the project manager must be able to manage and communicate across both. Organizational culture also plays a critical role. Some organizations may resist partial agility, preferring uniformity. However, hybrid models have proven effective in industries like finance, telecom, and defense, where both regulatory control and innovation must coexist. PMI research supports this, showing increased adoption of hybrid approaches as a sign of their growing relevance.

Tools and Implementation in Hybrid Environments: Hybrid environments typically operate on two levels of tooling: Senior management tracks overall progress using traditional tools like Gantt charts, milestone schedules, or MS Project. Delivery teams use Agile tools like Jira, Azure DevOps, or Trello for sprint-level planning and task management. For example, in a hybrid SAP project, the project manager might maintain a master plan in MS Project, showing major milestones like “Sprint 1, Sprint 2, Integration Testing, UAT, Go-Live.” Meanwhile, the development team manages the tasks within Sprint 1 as user stories in Jira. To bridge these two layers, the project manager hosts regular sync meetings to align progress, possibly coordinates through Scrum of Scrums, bringing together sub-teams working in different delivery streams. This dual structure enables consistent oversight and governance at the top, while empowering flexibility and autonomy at the execution level—a hallmark of effective hybrid project management.

A key consideration in hybrid project management is to avoid combining the worst of both worlds. Poorly implemented hybrid models often result in Agile teams being deprived of flexibility while still burdened by Waterfall-style bureaucracy. Alternatively, rigid Waterfall plans may constantly need revisions to keep pace with the variable delivery speed of Agile teams. To prevent such dysfunction, organizations must ensure thorough planning and alignment among all stakeholders before transitioning to a hybrid approach. It is essential to communicate Agile working principles clearly to senior management, while also translating executive expectations and reporting needs back to the delivery teams. In short, cultural alignment is the key to hybrid success.

Interestingly, the SAP Activate methodology itself can be viewed as a form of practical hybrid. The “Fit-to-Standard” workshops allow for flexible and iterative discovery of requirements (Agile-like), but the results are locked in through scope baselining, creating a defined product backlog (predictive). The Realize phase progresses through Agile sprints, while the Deploy phase follows a Waterfall-like structure, with a carefully scheduled cutover and go-live. This combination positions Activate as a “bridge between Waterfall and Agile” —ideal for SAP projects that need agility without abandoning structured control.

In Summary, hybrid approaches embody a “methodology-as-needed” mindset, replacing rigid doctrine with pragmatism. The guiding principle is: “Use whatever works best for the nature of your project.” When implemented correctly, hybrid models can truly offer the best of both worlds: senior management has structured plans and documentation to rely on, while teams enjoy the flexibility of Agile practices in their day-to-day work. However, if poorly designed, a hybrid model can also combine the worst aspects of both approaches—overplanning with no room for change, or chaotic delivery with no strategic alignment. The difference lies in the skill and judgment of the project manager, whose ability to navigate both cultures—structured and adaptive—is the deciding factor in success.

SAP Activate – Next-Generation Methodology in SAP Projects

SAP Activate is SAP’s next-generation implementation methodology, specifically designed for S/4HANA and cloud-based solutions. Introduced in 2015 to replace the older ASAP (Accelerated SAP) methodology, SAP Activate incorporates modern project management approaches tailored to today’s dynamic IT environments. It consists of three main components: SAP Best Practices, Guided Practices, and Activate Methodology. Our focus here is on the Activate Methodology, which offers project teams a phased roadmap similar to Waterfall but also integrates Agile delivery principles to enable faster value realization.

The Activate methodology consists of six phases: Discover, Prepare, Explore, Realize, Deploy, and Run. Each phase has clearly defined objectives and deliverables.

• Discover: This preliminary phase focuses on identifying the right SAP solution for the organization. Before an S/4HANA transformation, for example, companies assess their current processes, conduct business value analyses, and build a business case. SAP facilitates this phase with free trial systems and demo environments that help the customer explore the proposed solution. By the end of Discover, a formal decision is made — “Yes, we are moving forward with this SAP — “and the project receives executive approval to begin.

• Prepare: During this phase, the project team is assembled, the detailed project plan is created, and the required infrastructure and system access are set up. This phase is comparable to the "Initiating a Project" step in PRINCE2. Key planning activities include the definition of the project management structure, governance model, and sprint schedule (if Agile delivery is chosen). Training is also provided on tools and methodology. A core deliverable of this phase is a solid project foundation—for example, SAP Activate includes a “Project Team Readiness & Capability Assessment”, with gaps addressed before moving forward.

• Explore: This phase is an evolved version of the traditional "Business Blueprint" phase in ASAP. The major difference is that instead of gathering requirements through documents, Fit-to-Standard workshops are conducted on a live system. SAP Best Practices are demonstrated, allowing business users to evaluate preconfigured processes and compare them to their needs. Teams identify which processes “fit” and where “gaps” exist. These gaps and additional needs are logged into a Backlog, which becomes a central element in Activate. The scope is baselined at the end of this phase—defining which standard processes will be used and which enhancements will be built. Example: “The standard purchase order approval process will be used, but an additional integration for supplier risk scoring will be developed.”

• Realize: This is the build and configuration phase. SAP Activate promotes an iterative delivery model. The team works in sprints, implementing and customizing the system based on the prioritized backlog from the Explore phase. Parallel sprint teams may operate concurrently. After each sprint, results are reviewed with business users in “Show & Tell” sessions, gathering early feedback. This allows for mini-tests well before formal UAT. The Realize phase also includes integration testing, data migration rehearsals, and defect resolution. SAP Activate recommends a “solution demo” and acceptance sign-off after each sprint. By the end of this phase, the system should be fully configured and ready for User Acceptance Testing (UAT).

• Deploy: This phase focuses on cutover and go-live. It includes end-user training, production data migration, and final readiness checks. Though short, this phase is intense—similar to the go-live periods in Waterfall projects. SAP Activate emphasizes the need for a Cutover Plan and coordinated execution to maintain business continuity. Once all preparations are complete, the system is moved into production and becomes available to end users. The project is then formally closed.

• Run: This is the post-go-live operations phase. At this point, the project has ended, and the solution transitions to IT operations and support. While users interact with the live system, the IT team resolves incidents and implements minor enhancements as needed. SAP Activate does not provide a detailed Run phase methodology but refers to frameworks like ITIL for ongoing support practices. This phase also includes benefits realization monitoring and planning for potential future rollouts or phases.

SAP Activate methodology also provides guidance and document templates to support project teams throughout all these phases. SAP’s tool called Roadmap Viewer includes guide information and accelerators for each phase and activity. For instance, resources such as the “Fit-to-Standard Workshop Agenda” for the Explore phase or the “Sprint Backlog Template” for the Realize phase are available. Additionally, tools like SAP Solution Manager and Focused Build offer integrated support for the Activate methodology—enabling tracking from requirements to test management on a single platform.

One of the key aspects that distinguishes the Activate methodology is that it encapsulates SAP’s years of project experience. In other words, Activate is essentially built on SAP’s “best practices catalog.” Therefore, a project using Activate does not need to develop its methodology from scratch; it proceeds using SAP’s predefined process definitions and documents. Naturally, its scope of use is limited to SAP projects—such as S/4HANA transformations and SAP cloud product implementations. It is not intended to be directly applied to other enterprise software projects.

Another advantage of the Activate methodology is its compatibility with agile principles. SAP Activate explicitly defines itself as “an agile implementation approach for S/4HANA.” Use of backlogs, development through sprints, and frequent feedback loops are core elements of Activate. However, Activate is not a purely agile methodology; due to its phased structure and SAP’s service to corporate clients, it incorporates certain aspects derived from Waterfall. Therefore, it is not incorrect to see Activate as a hybrid methodology. It can even be compared to Axelos’ PRINCE2 Agile approach, where agile development is combined with predefined quality gates and documentation requirements.

Let’s evaluate Activate through an example: suppose a company decides to upgrade its current ERP system to SAP S/4HANA. In the Discover phase, senior management approves the business case, and the project team is established. During Prepare, the project plan is created, the team receives training, and system accesses are set up. In the Explore phase, Fit-to-Standard workshops are held with business units; SAP’s standard functionalities are reviewed, and additional company-specific requirements are written into the backlog. Then in the Realize phase, consultants configure and develop the system in 2- to 3-week sprints, conducting demos with key users at the end of each sprint. Meanwhile, the IT team works in parallel to clean and migrate data. After several sprints, once all functionalities are complete, integrated testing is performed, and user acceptance testing is passed. In the Deploy phase, the transition from the old to the new system takes place over a weekend using a cutover plan, and end users are trained. On Monday, operations begin on the new SAP system (Go-Live). During the Run phase, the project team provides post-go-live support for a while, then hands over to the support unit and formally closes the project. In this scenario, Activate serves as a guide through every project step.

Project tracking and tools with SAP Activate: Activate projects typically use tools like Jira to track backlogs and sprints, while high-level planning may be done using tools like MS Project. Specifically for SAP, the Solution Manager Focused Build tool enables tracking aligned with Activate steps; for example, you can create a backlog item and manage which solution elements it corresponds to (WRICEF – Workflow, Report, Interface, Conversion, Enhancement, Form). Project monitoring in Activate is secured by “end-of-phase quality checks” —at the end of each phase, certain deliverables are reviewed and formal approval is required to proceed to the next phase (similar to the PRINCE2 logic). For instance, the Realize phase cannot begin until the Solution Backlog is approved at the end of the Explore phase.

To sum up, SAP Activate stands out as an integrated methodology specific to SAP projects. It blends the discipline of Waterfall, the agility of Agile, and the ready-made best practices of SAP. For project managers and consultants in the SAP ecosystem, knowing Activate has become almost essential. SAP now provides documentation and roadmaps for its new products within the Activate framework. A project managed with Activate benefits from SAP’s structured guidance while also having the opportunity to implement modern project management practices (scrum, kanban, continuous integration, etc.). In conclusion, SAP Activate is a proven methodology tailored to the current needs of the SAP world and has established its credibility in the literature.

We have examined the characteristics of each methodology in detail above. So, what does the comparison look like when we place these side by side based on specific criteria? The comparison table below summarizes different methods in terms of workflow visualization, workload limitation, continuous improvement, flexibility, use cases, phase structure, advantages, and tools used. This table serves as a practical guide for those who want a quick comparison of methodologies.

Comparison Table of Methodologies

Comparison Table of Methodologies

Although the table above enables a quick comparison of methodologies, it’s important to remember that every project has its unique dynamics. Often, there is no such thing as “the best” methodology—there is only the most suitable one for the situation, the team, and the objectives. Even in companies that officially adopt a particular methodology, teams often adapt it over time to meet their specific needs—resulting in pragmatic, internally customized approaches. What truly matters is understanding the core principles and being able to tailor them effectively based on the project’s conditions.

Summary, Comments, and Implementation Notes

The spectrum of project management methodologies is much like a toolbox. While Waterfall offers discipline and predictability, agile approaches excel at navigating uncertainty and accelerating delivery. Lean and Six Sigma aim to optimize processes and elevate quality, whereas methods like PRINCE2 provide structure and governance assurance. SAP Activate emerges as a hybrid framework, carefully designed to meet the multifaceted needs of SAP projects, and is a “proven” methodology within the literature.

For an SAP project manager or consultant, the key skill lies in evaluating which methodology is most appropriate in a given context. For instance, if your project outputs are tightly regulated by law and require formal approval at every step, a pure Agile approach could be risky—here, a more structured path such as Waterfall or PRINCE2 might be necessary. On the other hand, if the goal is unclear and innovation is required, sticking strictly to Waterfall may hinder progress; Agile methods may yield better outcomes through iterative experimentation. SAP projects typically combine software implementation with organizational change management, making hybrid strategies particularly effective. You may start with a structured framework for analysis and design (e.g., Activate’s Explore phase), apply Agile sprints for development, and return to a more controlled approach for deployment and cutover.

It’s also critical to emphasize that methodology is a means, not an end. The ultimate goal is project success and delivering the intended value. Methodologies should serve that goal, and if they don’t, they must be adapted. Sometimes, “bending the rules” is necessary—for example, if your team finds three-week sprints more suitable than the standard two, Scrum doesn't forbid it. Likewise, implementing PRINCE2 doesn’t mean you’re required to produce a 100-page PID; you document what’s necessary and relevant.

With this perspective, the healthiest approach is to learn all methodologies—including SAP Activate—thoroughly, but without dogmatic adherence. While SAP Activate reflects SAP’s deep project experience, blindly applying every activity in every project is not always ideal. The best outcomes often come from selecting the most relevant activities based on the project’s nature. For example, in a small SAP e-commerce integration project, spending too much time in the Discover phase might be unnecessary—jumping directly to Prepare or Explore may be more efficient. This kind of flexibility relies on the judgment of experienced project managers.

In the end—whether you follow Waterfall, Agile, Hybrid, or SAP Activate—the secret to success lies not in the methodology itself, but in the capabilities and cohesion of the people applying it. Effective communication, clear roles, executive support, and team motivation are the true drivers of success, regardless of which methodology is chosen. The methodology is simply a framework to manage these factors effectively.

Therefore, mastering methodologies is critical for any SAP professional—but just as crucial is the ability to align them with the right internal culture and supporting processes.

References

• Atlassian. “Waterfall Methodology for Project Management.” Atlassian Agile Coach. Accessed July 20, 2025. https://www.atlassian.com/agile/project-management/waterfall-methodology

• Lucidchart. “The Pros and Cons of Waterfall Methodology.” Lucidchart Blog, 7-minute read. Accessed July 20, 2025. https://www.lucidchart.com/blog/pros-and-cons-of-waterfall-methodology

• Startinfinity. “Project Management Methodologies – An Ultimate Guide.” Infinity Blog. Accessed July 18, 2025. (A guide covering Waterfall, Agile, Scrum, Kanban, Lean, PRINCE2, and Six Sigma sections.)

• Wrike, Artem Gurnov. “What Is Scrum in Agile?” Wrike Project Management Guide. Last updated November 24, 2024. https://www.wrike.com/project-management-guide/faq/what-is-scrum-in-agile/

• Startinfinity. “Kanban Methodology — A Visual System for Managing Work.” Infinity Blog. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://startinfinity.com/project-management-methodologies/kanban

• Startinfinity. “What Is Lean Methodology and Is It for You?” Infinity Blog. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://startinfinity.com/project-management-methodologies/lean

• Startinfinity. “An Overview of Six Sigma Methodology in Project Management.” Infinity Blog. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://startinfinity.com/project-management-methodologies/six-sigma

• Startinfinity. “Prince2 Project Management Methodology: What You Need to Know.” Infinity Blog. Accessed July 18, 2025. https://startinfinity.com/project-management-methodologies/prince2

• Toptal, Monica Zaleski (ed.). “Traversing Hybrid Project Management: The Bridge Between Agile and Waterfall.” Toptal Project Management Blog, 2023. Accessed July 19, 2025. https://www.toptal.com/project-managers/agile/hybrid-project-management-a-middle-ground-between-agile-and-waterfall

• Harvard Business Review, Antonio Nieto-Rodriguez. “It’s Time to End the Battle Between Waterfall and Agile.” Harvard Business Review, October 10, 2023. (Key takeaways on hybrid approaches referenced from the summary section.)

• Scribd, Manas Ranjan Pattu. “SAP Activate Methodology.” Scribd Platform, 2021. Accessed July 19, 2025. (Relevant section: definition of SAP Activate methodology.)

• Surety Systems. “SAP Activate Methodology 101: Overview and Key Phases.” Surety Systems Insights, December 6, 2022 (Updated June 13, 2025)

• LeanIX. “SAP Activate Methodology: Improve Project Quality and Success.” LeanIX Wiki. Accessed July 19, 2025. (Referenced for descriptions of Activate phases.)

• SAP Press, Kalidu Shah (Ed.). SAP Activate: Project Management for SAP S/4HANA. SAP PRESS, 2019. (Used as an authoritative source for phase structure and building blocks of SAP Activate.)

• Project Management Institute (PMI). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), 6th Edition. Project Management Institute, 2017. (Used for background on project life cycles and hybrid approaches.)