data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e4131/e4131ccafc4d4ceb48321337e35b3eb12381fd2a" alt="the grey zone"
The Grey Zone: Why Your Organisation Needs Both Agile and Traditional Delivery to Survive
Why Your Organisation is Going Hybrid—Like It or Not
Why is it that, despite decades of project management maturity and the rise of Agile, so many organisations still feel like they’re operating in chaos?
Hybrid delivery models are everywhere—and for good reason. The market isn’t wrong. Organisations aren’t adopting hybrid approaches because they’re indecisive or stuck in the past. They’re doing it because there’s a real requirement: the need to balance structure with flexibility, predictability with adaptability. But let’s be honest—hybrid models are messy. Combining traditional phased approaches with modern Agile methods often feels like trying to mix oil and water. So, how do we turn this chaos into clarity without losing the flexibility that makes Agile powerful or the structure that keeps projects on track?
These are the questions I’ve been grappling with lately, especially after several conversations with Chief Digital Officers (CDOs) and Project Management Offices (PMOs). What I’ve learned is that many organisations are stuck in what I call the grey zone—a space where Agile and traditional delivery methods collide, creating systems that are often chaotic, unpredictable, and hard to manage.
But here’s the thing: not all complexity is bad. Some work is inherently complex and requires experimentation, adaptability, and a willingness to embrace uncertainty. Think of building innovative software or launching a new product—these are tasks that can’t be reduced to simple, repeatable processes. On the other hand, some processes are unnecessarily complex and should be simplified. For example, building software as if it were a construction project—with rigid, linear phases and no room for iteration—creates chaos where it doesn’t need to exist. Similarly, treating every initiative like an experiment (imagine ‘testing’ a bridge by driving a car over it before it’s fully built) is equally problematic. The key is to recognise when complexity is unnecessary and simplify where it makes sense.
The goal, then, isn’t to make everything simple. It’s to simplify where it makes sense and embrace complexity where it’s necessary. And to do that, we need frameworks, data, and the right tools.
The Cynefin Framework: Making Sense of Chaos
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57bf6/57bf6565a86f8a616c69be155d1d752c63547eeb" alt="moving from chaos to simple where it makes sense moving from chaos to simple where it makes sense"
One of the most powerful tools for understanding this balance is the Cynefin framework, developed by Dave Snowden. Cynefin categorises systems into four domains: chaotic, complex, complicated, and simple. Many organisations I work with are stuck in the chaotic or complex domains, where systems feel unstructured and outcomes are unpredictable. The challenge is to move toward complicated or even simple processes where appropriate, without losing the flexibility needed for truly complex work.
For example, managing a portfolio of projects might be complicated but manageable with the right data and tools. On the other hand, innovating a new product might remain complex, requiring iterative experimentation and adaptability. The key is knowing the difference—and having the frameworks and tools to support both.
My Journey: From Resistance to Embracing the Grey Zone
I’ll admit, I haven’t always been a fan of hybrid approaches. In fact, I used to be firmly against them. As an Agile advocate, I believed that organisations needed to fully commit to modern ways of working to see real transformation. Hybrid models, in my mind, were a cop-out—a way to avoid making hard decisions.
But over time, as I worked with more clients, I began to see things differently. I realised that most Agile transformations end up with elements of both Agile and traditional approaches. And often, the benefits of Agile—like flexibility, collaboration, and faster delivery—were under-realised because organisations were trying to force everything into one box or the other.
This realisation was humbling. It forced me to confront my own biases and acknowledge that the grey zone isn’t a failure—it’s a reality. And rather than fighting it, I’ve learned to embrace it. Now, my focus is on helping organisations navigate this space, using frameworks like Cynefin and leveraging data and tools to move toward simplicity where it makes sense.
A Lesson from the Trenches: Projects and Agile Can Coexist
A recent experience drove this point home for me. I was involved in a large Agile transformation at an Australian corporate. We had hundreds of teams mobilising into a new organisational structure based on persistent, scaled Agile delivery teams—what we called “tribes” or “groups.” Over several months, tens of thousands of people moved into this new design, embracing a modern, adaptive way of working.
But here’s where it got interesting. Months after the rollout, people started asking questions like, “What happens when I need to get a piece of work done by this group, and this one, and this one?” It turned out that the new Agile structures hadn’t fully accounted for cross-business-unit initiatives. And what do we call those? PROJECTS.
This was a lightbulb moment for me. You can have persistent, mission-driven Agile teams with full adaptive planning and iterative delivery. But there will always be activities—projects—that require coordination across teams, start and stop dates, and temporary resourcing. Projects and Agile delivery aren’t mutually exclusive; they need to coexist. That’s the reality of the grey zone.
Data and Tools: The Keys to Clarity
One of the biggest insights from my recent work is that data is the bridge between chaos and clarity. Without consistent data collection, management, aggregation, and visualisation, organisations have little hope of moving through the Cynefin domains. Data helps us understand where we are, where we need to go, and how to get there.
But data alone isn’t enough. Organisations also need the right tools to support their journey. A robust tooling stack—digital work management, project management, portfolio management, and collaboration tools—is essential. These tools not only help workers execute tasks but also enable managers and leaders to collect and visualise data effectively.
In my conversations with CDOs, we often end up discussing their tooling solutions. What’s working? What’s not? And how can we ensure that the tools we choose support both Agile and traditional approaches?
The Ultimate Goal: Simplify Where It Makes Sense
The journey from chaos to simplicity isn’t about making everything simple. It’s about understanding what can be simplified and what needs to remain complex. It’s about helping organisations move from the grey zone to a place where they can thrive—whether that means creating predictable, repeatable processes or embracing the uncertainty of complex, experimental work.
For PMOs and delivery teams, this means:
Using frameworks like Cynefin to diagnose where your systems currently sit.
Leveraging data to make informed decisions and visualise progress.
Choosing tools that support both Agile and traditional approaches.
Simplifying processes where it makes sense, while embracing complexity where it’s necessary.
A Final Thought
Transformation is never black and white. It’s messy, complex, and often frustrating. But it’s also full of opportunity. By embracing the grey zone and focusing on the journey from chaos to clarity, we can help organisations achieve the predictability they need—without losing the flexibility required for truly complex work.