Waterfall Methodology : Waterfall Theory

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

The project will be managed using a modified waterfall technique. In this approach, the initial two phases of the

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.

It has been observed that in software development, change is unavoidable and must be accommodated for in the life cycle. A number of alternative process models have been introduced in order to attempt to fix the issues in the Waterfall model. An early modification to the standard Waterfall method introduced prototyping as a feedback and discovery mechanism to identify misunderstandings and omissions early on in the process (Neill, 2004). Other process models attempted to further get rid of the risks of misunderstandings by breaking down projects

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

Since the method was developed for manufacturing and construction projects, it made sense in these industries that a portion of the project was fixed and unchangeable after a phase completed. Imagine the construction of a road, you prep and lay down a foundation then eventually lay down the final asphalt or concrete layer. It wouldn’t make sense to build in the ability to go back and change the foundation after the top layer was set. Obviously, software engineering is very different and therefore requires a much different approach to development. Besides slow turnaround, there were many other criticisms of the waterfall method. Some included redesign, rework, and retesting due to lack of knowledge about requirements when a project began. Also, due to the extremely long lead and delivery times, requirements changed or projects were dropped altogether leaving a company with a half-built loss on the balance sheet. An industry average put the estimated time for any software project using the Waterfall approach at 3 years. This was the environment that enabled a few forward-thinking developers to meet and design a new and better approach.

The traditional development method requires the definition and documentation of a stable set of requirements at the beginning of the project. It was inherited by other projects mainly related to construction which focused on the completion of one phase of production before moving on to the next phase, for example, laying the foundations of a building first and then proceeding with the further stages (Bowes 2014). Similarly, in Waterfall, the requirement gathering and designing work is done upfront before any coding takes place. The basic notion behind the traditional development approaches is that the projects are comparatively less complex, linear and predictable with clearly defined system boundaries which makes it simple to plan and follow without having any room for changes (Spundak 2014). Moreover, traditional development method depicts the requirements document as he key piece of documentation. The gathering of all the requirements, getting a sign off from the customer and then starting with the development of the project gives the project a limit of

Focus is kept on the recurrence of condensed work cycles and also at the functional product yielded by the outcome, but in waterfall technique only once chance is been given to the development team to keep the project aspects right. But under the agile technique each and every feature of development including the design, requirements, is thoroughly checked under its lifecycle (Mahfuj et al, 2012). There is always some time to steer in another direction if a team stops at regular interval say after every two weeks and re-evaluates the project done.

I think waterfall is suitable for commercial transactions in which contracts are signed and money paid. But while working on internal clients, it is harder, based on my experience, treating the introduced changes at the last minute, when people from your own organization, having an executive management support, asked about it.

incremental development process makes it the opposite to the rigid requirement needs of the Waterfall method. Agile methodologies are open to change as the project starts and progresses. The contrasting requirements need of the two methodologies, is one of the main contrast points in today’s project life cycle processes. There is a constant struggle between the two processes even in today’s business landscape. I have worked at Google as a program manager - mobile and after Google, I worked at a satellite manufacturing company called Space Systems Loral. The former is a software company and latter is a hardware company. At Google, they have embraced agile methodologies for software development, as the company is very progressive in nature. They are also very open to feedback from their users, and therefore agile allows them to take in product suggestions and address users’ needs with no predetermined rigid requirements from clients or users for initial requirements. Work is done in mini project or sprints format and when there is a need to shift directions, everything already worked on is scrapped if not necessary, and then a complete reset occurs. Since the project’s initial framework is not known at the time the project starts, the final product can deviate drastically from what was initially envisioned. At Space Systems Loral, being that it is a hardware satellite manufacturing company, they inherently have to adopt the waterfall methodology for their needs.

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.

A software development methodology is a structure imposed on the development of a software product. It is used to structure, plan and control the process of developing an information system including procedures, techniques, tools and documentation aids. A wide variety of methodologies have evolved over the years, majority aggress that all these methodologies are distinguished into two categories – Heavyweight or Lightweight. Heavyweight methodologies are also known as traditional methodologies which approach system development with standard, well-defined processes such as Waterfall, Spiral and Unified Process. Lightweight methodologies

Waterfall Model is the first software development process model proposed by Royce in 1970 which is a linear sequential software development life cycle (SDLC) model. It is a sequential process model which does not overlap. It means that until the one phase is not completed then next phase cannot start.

Experimentation Methodology is a way of arriving at solutions to the problems at hand by actioning the solution in a controlled/miniature environment. The controlled environment contains the actual information or data, which will be used in our ‘trial and error’ scrutinising and subsequent solutioning. This methodology is one of the widely used methods where the size and cost of the actual project is very high. This greatly helps in reducing the cost in case of errors, since we are working only on a miniaturised simulated environment. From the IT project perspective, this method is used by various IT consultancies in the name of ‘pilot project’.

“Product development is the process of designing, creating and marketing new products or services to benefit the customers”. Product development comprises of all the processes, which leads the formation of a product starting from the Initial idea to the sale of the final product. It is the key tool to keep the companies in competition with the competitor products and to keep up with the changes and trends in the market. Product development comes into play when a firm wants to develop a new product to target a specific market segment or in improving an existing product or its packaging. Product development plays a key role in the success of a product and also on the lifetime of the product. Most successful organizations and manufacturing companies are more likely to have some kind of formally defined and well-structured development process. Although the product development process is defined differently from different manufacturers, it contains the some important phases in common. The general key processes or phases that involve in the product development are: