Metodologias tradicionais, ágeis e híbridas em projetos de engenharia: uma revisão bibliográfica

Abstract

The aim of this study is to investigate and analyze traditional, agile, and hybrid approaches to project management in the engineering field. A literature review was conducted and complemented by the analysis of practical experiences reported in prior studies, in order to discuss the effects of each approach and identify factors that influence methodological suitability according to project characteristics and organizational structure. Overall, traditional approaches tend to provide stronger upfront planning, greater documental assurance, more hierarchical organizational arrangements, and teams with lower autonomy, which makes them more appropriate for projects with stable requirements. In contrast, agile methodologies are recognized for fostering adaptability, frequent communication, and continuous feedback, making them more suitable for scenarios marked by high uncertainty and frequent changes throughout development. The comparison among the three approaches also highlights that hybrid models have increasingly consolidated themselves as a robust alternative in engineering, especially because they balance governance with adaptability. In summary, there is no universally superior methodology across all situations; the most consistent choice is typically the one guided by objective criteria and the specific project context. Therefore, factors such as requirement and scope stability, the need for documentation and traceability, organizational culture, and the size and complexity of the work should guide the definition of the most appropriate approach, avoiding generic decisions or those based solely on preference.