ok... so, can you clarify your question? Because I'm still confused. The subject line you gave mentions having a waterfall process in Scrum and your post talks about no estimation because you already know the deadline. In Scrum, estimates are part of the planning toolkit you use to give stakeholders an idea of the answer to their perpetual question, "When will it be done?"
Please restate your question in its entirety so it's clear what exactly you're asking.
I guess my confusion is in your equating of "knowing an estimate" and "waterfall". How are you making this connection?
Also, "knowing an estimate" is contradictory. If you know, then you don't need to estimate. If you don't know, then you make an estimate. Again, what is "waterfall" about this? Maybe you need to give a concrete example so we can have some insight into your thought process around this.
Michael Rivera wrote:Some you do not need to estimates because they are already known
Just because you know the requirements and goals does not mean you can make a waterfall declaration of time. Aside from the fact that the actual time is almost inevitably going to be double or triple what the users will allow you to give*, the point of Agile is that the process is self-modifying and that therefore goals are expected to slip.
And no one really "knows" what they want, least of all the people who ask for it. Before Agile was Agile I learned to sit with the actual users of the system and watch them use it. Often that led to significant improvements and even simplifications.
* Ironically, my experience is that the "challenging" parts of a project are not usually where I end up burning up unanticipated time and in fact are often done faster than anticipated. On the other hand, spending 3 days finding that misplaced comma, missing bracket or improperly-captitalized element…
Sources may include data from the Fakebook Research Foundation with support from Gargle University