Comparing And Contrasting Waterfall Vs. Agile

Many reasons exist for the extremely high failure rates of software projects but one major reason is poor communication between the end-user and the software developer which leads to a lack of definition or scope of work. One resolution to this problem is a well communicated document similar to a Software Requirements Specification (SRS). I used to belong to a discussion group that dealt with automation issues. The topic of software project failure and its causes was a constant topic of discussion. A common theme that was echoed by our members was that, most of the time projects fail due to unstable requirements that were not

Cost and resource needs are higher for traditional than Agile due to Waterfall’s sequential development phase of all requirements determined in the beginning, software design and finally implementation of master design. The need for all information up front takes substantial time to gather and the sequential design does not allow for project changes as the flow enters into the programming stage. With Agile, costs remain low because there exists an incremental and iterative approach to the project, meaning less time is used to collect all requirements up front, the

This is an issue for current processes because there are often incomplete system requirements at the start of development and because requirements may change and the process is not set up to adapt to late-breaking changes.

Planning team capacity and developing a pace that is sustainable pace. Using sprint reviews and science fairs. This approach would be implemented in a similar format at my organization. Since agile encourages breaking work down into smaller chunks for delivery in increments, it would be more applicable. The traditional waterfall approach does not account for sudden changes, so it would not be appropriate in my organization.

Using the waterfall approach the system developers will be able to focus on one piece of the system and move on each part separately. This will give the design team more time to focus on small sections of the new coding. Moving from one stage to the next means that each step has been checked thoroughly and is completed.

This article by Phillip A. Laplante and Colin J. Neill of Penn State University explores the rumors of the demise of the waterfall model. The Waterfall process model progresses software products linearly from conception, through requirements, design, code, and test (Neill, 2004). The Waterfall method was developed in 1970 by Winston Royce when computer systems were monolithic, number-crunching entities with rudimentary front ends and users’ needs were filtered through the partisan minds of the computer illuminati building the systems (Neill, 2004). Most systems built in that time did not pay much attention to input from stakeholders, which is a good environment for the Waterfall method to work in – an environment where requirements seldom change after specification due to the fact that users are not involved in the development and therefore cannot provide feedback regarding incorrect assumptions or missing features (Neill, 2004).

SC will compare traditional and various iterative implementations of the SDLC. For example, Braude and Bernstein (2011) state that the popular and mature waterfall process model promotes simple comprehension, project management, and resource distribution of small project development lifecycles. The serial nature of the traditional SDLC leans toward the gathering of all requirements at the beginning of the project whereas the majority of testing occurs at the end of the lifecycle. The waterfall model’s linear design creates disastrous risks for large projects if the project team does not understand the core requirements during the initial phase of the project or the detection of major problems occurs toward the end of the project. On the other hand, a spiral model significantly reduces risks for large projects whereas complexity causes overkill for smaller projects. The project’s physical scope, timeline, budget, and resource determine which the most optimal process model for a project. Table 1.1 displays a comparison chart that SC uses to weigh advantages and disadvantages of traditional SDLC and Agile development methodologies. SC will utilize this chart to determine which development methodology is utilized based on the primary amount of questions answered positively weighed with the clients business case requirements. “Agile software development is a

There is a cross section of projects ranging from a few weeks to a few years. There are also a wide cross section of customers, those capable of articulating clearly their requirements and the ones that are not clear on their requirements and the overall outcome to be achieved. The level of programmers within the Information Technology Department, where development work is executed, range from intermediate to advance or above average programming competence. The Waterfall approach is easier to manage and can be utilized for projects where there are clear requirements and the project is determined to be a long term one. Also, this method may be best suited given the organization’s requirements for thorough documentation and project accountability, when it comes to budget and cost. The Agile methodology can be used for projects where the requirements as well as the expectation from the end product are not as clear. The developers that are above average in terms of their competence can also use this method. In addition, the Agile method is also best suited for the projects that would require rapid

Project failures, budget overruns and schedule misses are typical results of poor requirements definition and management. Recognizing the importance of accurately defining requirements and managing the change management process for requirements throughout a project’s life cycle can contribute to a successfully executed project plan. During the requirements definition process, focusing on answering questions in a few key areas greatly increases a project’s likelihood for success.

This paper describes Agile development methodologies and their benefits. Section II presents key elements of Agile. Section III presents benefits of Agile development methodologies over traditional waterfall methodologies.

Looking at each methodology from a different perspective, the management perspective, unveils additional benefits and setbacks. The rigidity of the Waterfall method for software development can be cumbersome when dealing with changing expectations, but it makes it easier for management to manage the project’s progression. Having clear goals makes it easy for managers to track the development process. It is more difficult to track a project where requirements are constantly evolving. Most of the projects (not involving software development) in our department are tracked through their process. As goals are achieved, completion nears 100%.

From sequential, heavy weight methodologies which are more predictive in nature and lengthy in process, today there is a shifting focus towards simple, light weight methodologies involving prototyping which provides a part of the final output at every stage of development. Several studies have reported software project failures due to lack of focus on requirements and the extent of dynamism involved in business requirement definition (Gasisas, 2009).

Compared to the agile, another famous software development mode called waterfall is driven by technique documents and this mode require the team to write a lot of requirement documents containing all the requirements to a certain software. It is written to allow people to understand what software should do. So the developers will develop the functions of software according to the documents strictly. But the agile software development just focuses on the necessary document. It is avoid taking a lot of time to write the requirement documents. Its opinion is that the face to face communication between the human is the most important thing. So the agile think the human is

The waterfall model consists of five phases such as requirements, Design, implementation, verification and maintenance. The method is a sequential design process where progress is seen as flowing downwards in a steadily manner, each development phase has its own distinct goals. The model is similar to water flowing down a cliff it can only flow in one way and cannot go back up it is the same with waterfall development ,after a development phase is completed it proceeds to the next development phase you cannot go back.

Abstract – Today, there are millions web application or web app on the internet, including app market, such as Amazon app store, Apple Store, Chrome App Store, etc. The web application is server-based application, and client no need to install the software in their local pc or laptop. User just need to use compatible browser to access the web application at anywhere and anytime. In fact, the web application still a form of software. To develop a successful software, an appropriate software development method is critical. Because, it is a guide book to monitor the development life cycle throughout the development project. In this work, two popular methods will