In reality, nobody would use waterfall in situations where requirements are subject to change.  And most people wouldn't use a strict waterfall at all for a big project.

There will most likely be some wiggle room in the development process to handle changes.  A couple of decades ago, Rational Unified Process was popular.  It defined a series of iterations, during which you work towards the finished product.  The iterative model allows time to fix problems found in the early iterations.

Strict waterfall is not suitable for projects where requirements are subject to change. In today’s fast-paced environment, flexibility is crucial. While waterfall has its strengths, particularly when the requirements are well understood upfront and unlikely to evolve, it struggles in large projects with shifting demands.

The Rational Unified Process (RUP) exemplifies how methodologies have evolved to address this issue. By incorporating iterations, it allows for more flexibility in responding to changes and addressing issues early in development. However, RUP also brings its own challenges, such as potential overhead in documentation and managing multiple iterations. It provides a structured approach while allowing teams to adapt, making it more effective in dynamic environments compared to strict waterfall.

The key takeaway is that no single methodology is a one-size-fits-all solution. Each has its place, but what truly drives success is blending the best practices from different approaches to fit the specific needs of the project. A hybrid approach, combining the structure of waterfall with the flexibility of iterative models, might provide the right balance depending on the project’s nature and the team’s experience.

Ultimately, the goal should always be to deliver value while staying on track with time, cost, and quality targets, and being able to adapt to changes without getting bogged down by process for process’s sake.

Strict waterfall is not suitable for projects where requirements are subject to change. In today’s fast-paced environment, flexibility is crucial. While waterfall has its strengths, particularly when the requirements are well understood upfront and unlikely to evolve, it struggles in large projects with shifting demands.

The Rational Unified Process (RUP) exemplifies how methodologies have evolved to address this issue. By incorporating iterations, it allows for more flexibility in responding to changes and addressing issues early in development. However, RUP also brings its own challenges, such as potential overhead in documentation and managing multiple iterations. It provides a structured approach while allowing teams to adapt, making it more effective in dynamic environments compared to strict waterfall.

The key takeaway is that no single methodology is a one-size-fits-all solution. Each has its place, but what truly drives success is blending the best practices from different approaches to fit the specific needs of the project. A hybrid approach, combining the structure of waterfall with the flexibility of iterative models, might provide the right balance depending on the project’s nature and the team’s experience.

Ultimately, the goal should always be to deliver value while staying on track with time, cost, and quality targets, and being able to adapt to changes without getting bogged down by process for process’s sake.