The paper "Comparison Framework for the Sustainability of Methodologies for the Development of a Fixit TV and Video" is a great example of a capstone project. One of the key challenges faced by developers when creating a software-intensive system entails how to manage many developers organized into teams, mostly at various sites, collaborating on numerous iterations, products, platforms, as well as releases. Lack of effective control causes the development process to quickly degenerate into problems. Coordinating the artifacts and activities of teams and developers entails implementing constant workflows for handling alterations to software as well as other development aspects.
The management enables an effective allocation depending on the project’ s risks and priorities and it dynamically handles the work on the changes within iterations. In addition to creating the software iteratively, the practice facilitates constant monitoring of change in order to dynamically determine and respond to setbacks. Managing releases, as well as iterations, entails establishing as well as generating a tested baseline at the achievement of every iteration. Preserving traceability among the aspects of every release and among aspects across numerous parallel releases is important for evaluating and dynamically handling the effect of change.
Software development problems are avoided by choosing the correct software development process. A software development process has four functions-it offers direction to team activities and specifies the aspects which should be improved and when they should be developed (Booch 1995). It manages the role of the team and individual developers as a whole and provides the standard for examining and assessing the project activities and products (Booch 1995). Without a well-defined process, the development team develops in an Adhoc way, with success depending on the efforts of a few dedicated individual contributors, which is not a sustainable solution. System development methodologies are methods of improving the control and management of the software development process.
They enable simplifying, structuring of the process, as well as standardizing the development process and product by specifying the techniques to be used and activities to be done. These methodologies improve system development quality and productivity. This paper will compare four different systems development methodologies-the Structured System Analysis and Design (SSADM), Soft System Analysis (Multi-view), Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM Atern), and Rational Unified Process (RUP) in development of a Fixit TV and Video.
Various categories will cover for every methodology; the scope of the information systems development lifecycle, iterative and incremental development, identification of roles and responsibilities for each activity and stage, user/stakeholder participation, project control and planning, the use of project client’ s information resource, logical and physical models and early delivery of products. Assessment of the most appropriate methodology for the development of a Fixit TV and Video Various factors were identified for assessment of the appropriateness of the different methodologies for the development of a Fixit TV and Video.
They include the scope of the information systems development lifecycle, iterative and incremental development, identification of roles and responsibilities for each activity and stage, user/stakeholder participation, project control and planning, the use of project client’ s information resource, logical and physical models, and early delivery of products. These factors are the most beneficial to the development of a Fixit TV and Video project. The following assessment will focus on the methodology, which satisfies the most criteria and hence provide the most benefit to the project client.
Aggelinos, G & Katsikas, S 2011, ‘Enhancing SSADM with disaster recovery plan activities’, Information Management & Computer Security, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 248-261.
Aked, M 2013, Risk Reduction with the RUP Phase Plan, IBM, viewed November 20, 2013, http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/1826.html#N100E4
Avison, D & Wood-Harper, A1990, Multiview: An Exploration in Information Systems Development, McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead
Avison, D & Wood-Harper, A 1991, Information systems development research: An exploration of ideas in practice, The Computer Journal, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 98-112.
Bittner, K & Spence, I 2007, Managing Iterative Software Development Projects, Pearson Education, Boston, MA.
Booch, G 1995, Object Solutions: Managing the Object-Oriented Project, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
Checkland, P 1999, Systems thinking, systems practice: A 30-year retrospective, John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York.
Downs, E, Clare, P & Coe, I 1992, Structured Systems Analysis and Design Method: Application and Context, Prentice-Hall.
DSDM Consortium 2010, The DSDM Atern Student Workbook: a guide to the definitive Agile framework, DSDM Group.
Eva, M 1994, SSADM version 4: a user's guide, McGraw-Hill, London.
Highsmith, J 2004, Agile Project Management: Creating Innovative Products, Pearson Education, Boston, MA.
Kelkar, S 2004, Structured Systems: Analysis and Design: A Concise Study, Asoke K. Ghosh, New Delhi.
Kruchten, P 2003, The rational unified process: an introduction, Mass, Boston,
Martin, R 2003, Agile Software Development: Principles, Patterns, and Practices, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
Office of the Government Chief Information Officer 2012, An introduction to Structured Systems Analysis & Design Methodology (SSADM), viewed November 20, 2013, http://www.ogcio.gov.hk/en/infrastructure/methodology/ssadm/doc/s3a_pub.pdf
Shuja, A & Krebs, J 2007, IBM Rational Unified Process Reference and Certification Guide: Solution Designer (RUP), IBM Press.
Walker, R 1998, Software Project Management: A Unified Framework, Addison-Wesley.