Abstract Science Construction’s business is in planning, developing and building road projects. The major of its clients are municipalities, city governments, and other public sector entities. While the bankruptcy rates for these clients is very low, when economic downturns happen, their ability to pay in a timely fashion also suffers. This leads to businesses such as Science Construction needing to take on additional debt and to find creative methods in order to stay afloat during times of recession. Methods such as selling accounts receivables at discounted rates and taking larger lines of credit through banks and other lending institutions are some of the ways organizations can remain viable when their cash inflows have turned into a trickle. Science Construction is asking the Turkish Courts to postpone their bankruptcy proceedings for a year while they attempt to restructure. Through this, suggestions such as forcing shareholders to pay their debt to the organization, gaining credi
The system development life cycle, known as the SDLC, is the industry-standard approach to managing phases of an engineering project (it can be thinks of as the equivalent to the scientific method for software development and other IT initiatives). The common breakdown of the SDLC includes seven phases that trace a product or project from a planned idea to its final release into operation and maintenance (innovativearchitects, n.d).
There are a number of different System Development Life cycle methodologies, such as (innovativearchitects, n.d):
- Waterfall: The waterfall approach is one of the oldest SDLC models, but it has fallen out of favor in recent years. This model involves a rigid structure that demands all system requirements be defined at the very start of a project. Only then can the design and development stages begin.
- Iterative: The iterative methodology takes the waterfall model and cycles through it several times in small increments. Rather than stretching the entire project across the phases of the SDLC, each step is turned into several mini-projects that can add value as the product evolves.
The iterative approach shares many of the same goals as the agile model, except external customers are less involved and the scope of each increment is normally fixed.
- DevOps: is one of the newest SDLC methodologies and is being adopted by many software companies and IT organizations. As its name suggests, the premise of DevOps is to bring development teams together with operational teams in order to streamline delivery and support.
The advantages of such an approach are that changes become more fluid, while organizational risk is reduced. Teams must have flexible resources in order for a DevOps arrangement to succeed.
- V-Model: An evolution of the classic waterfall methodology, the v-model SDLC process steps are flipped upwards after the coding phase. It’s not recommended for small projects because of the lack of flexibility and the higher-risk method, but the v-model is easier to manage and control for projects where requirements are static and clearly stated.
- Agile: The agile methodology is the opposite of the waterfall approach. Rather than treating requirements, design, and testing as large sequential steps, an agile model makes them all ongoing processes that require involvement from developers, management, and customers.
Work is typically broken into 2-4 week segments known as “sprints,” in which the responsible teams tackle the major needs of their customers and perform testing as they go. Agile tends to work well in small organizations, especially startups, where speed and flexibility is essential.
When selecting the best SDLC approach for your organization or company, it's important to remember that one solution may not fit every scenario or business. Certain projects may run best with a waterfall approach, while others would benefit from the flexibility in the agile or iterative models.
Figure below shows the comparison between waterfall and agile methodologies (innovativearchitects, n.d).
Fig. 1: Comparison between Waterfall and Agile methodologies
The Agile development movement began in earnest in the 1990s as a rejection of the establishment with its rather staid and seemingly sluggish development methods known generally by names such as the waterfall model or V-model. These older methods had gained a reputation for missing deadlines, going over budget or failing completely and Agile offered a means to make this a thing of the past (Inflectra, 2018).
All Agile methodologies share a set of core ideas which are prescribed from method to method in subtly different ways; iterative and incremental delivery of working code, frequent collaboration with stakeholders, closely working, self-organizing teams, and the ability to embrace change late in the project.
There are two sections of considering the methods as Agile or it may be Agile (Inflectra, 2018):
Section 1: Yes, it is Agile, includes the methods of: Scrum, Extreme Programming (XP), Kanban, and etc.
Section 2: It may be Agile, includes the methods of: Rapid Application Development (RAD), Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD), and etc.
There are a number of challenges non-Agile organizations face when attempting to adopt Agile development practices and the Scrum methodology (Freeman, 2015):
- Scrum fails to get traction or is a distraction from the real work of the project.
- Developers accustomed to working autonomously may find that Scrum is unnecessary and slows them down.
- Some development efforts don’t easily fit into a time-boxed sprint. Therefore, Scrum doesn’t work for.
- Innovative Architects. (n.d.). 8 Models of the System Development Life Cycle. Retrieved from:https://www.innovativearchitects.com/KnowledgeCenter/basic-IT-systems/8-SDLC-models.aspx.
References:
- Freeman, J. (2015). Common Problems Experienced When Adopting Agile Development. Retrieved from: https://www.seguetech.com/common-problems-experienced-when-adopting-agile-development/.
- Inflectra. (2018). Introduction to Agile Software Development Methods. Retrieved from: https://www.inflectra.com/ideas/whitepaper/introduction%20to%20agile%20development%20methods.aspx.
Comments