Sequencing process in not Waterfall

I have noticed that many Agile consultants misuse the term Waterfall using it to describe any sequencing process.

In many cases, their understanding of scheduling techniques is limited to basic principles of task-driven network analysis with little or no awareness of more advanced approaches like resource-driven network analysis method. As a result, any dependency-based planning is often lumped into the catch-all label of Waterfall.

This oversimplification leads to a narrow view of delivery practices, where:
1. The only perceived options for accelerating delivery are increasing resources or reducing scope.
2. Delays caused by poor dependency management are misattributed or masked by vague explanations.

Such a mindset restricts genuine improvement. Instead of utilising the full spectrum of scheduling, planning, and control techniques, teams fall into false dichotomies and reactive patterns missing the opportunity to build PredAptive delivery systems that combine predictability with adaptability.

Across the industry, there is a growing recognition that PredAptive approaches, those that intelligently integrate sequencing and resource management, are essential for navigating today’s delivery complexity. Still, in practice, many programs and portfolios merely rebrand outdated or dysfunctional delivery models (whether Scrum-based or CPM) and present them as “Hybrid.”

It’s time to stop demonising project sequencing as some kind of evil to be eliminated and start investing in the understanding and application of advanced computational planning methods.