In this BONUS episode, we explore the origins and persistence of waterfall methodology in software development with management consultant Henrik Mårtensson. Based on an article where he details the history of Waterfall, Henrik explains the historical context of waterfall, challenges the mental models that keep it alive in modern organizations, and offers insights into how systems thinking can transform our approach to software delivery. This conversation is essential for anyone looking to understand why outdated methodologies persist and how to move toward more effective approaches to software development.
The True Origins of Waterfall
“Waterfall came from the SAGE project, the first large software project in history, where they came up with a methodology based on an economic analysis.”
Henrik takes us on a fascinating historical journey to uncover the true origins of waterfall methodology. Contrary to popular belief, the waterfall approach wasn’t invented by Winston Royce but emerged from the SAGE project in the 1950s. Bennington published the original paper outlining this approach, while it was Bell and Tayer who later named it “waterfall” when referencing Royce’s work. Henrik explains how gated process models eventually led to the formalized waterfall methodology and points out that an entire generation of methods existed between waterfall and modern Agile approaches that are often overlooked in the conversation.
In this segment we refer to:
- The paper titled “Production of Large Computer Programs” by Herbert D. Benington (direct PDF link) Updated and re-published in 1983 in Annals of the History of Computing ( Volume: 5, Issue: 4, Oct.-Dec. 1983)
- Winston Royce’s paper from 1970 that erroneously is given the source of the waterfall term. Direct PDF Link.
- Bell and Thayer’s paper “Software Requirements: Are They Really A Problem?”, that finally “baptized” the waterfall process. Direct PDF link
Mental Models That Keep Us Stuck
“Fredrik Taylor’s model of work missed the concept of a system, leading us to equate busyness with productivity.”
