Sdlc Methodology
SDLC Methodology
Your Name
University of Phoenix
SDLC Methodology
The Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is a business practice used by many companies/corporations and serves as a guideline for developing systems & software. To understand how the SDLC can be either beneficial or detrimental to any system designer, we must first understand what the SDLC is and how it applies. The Higher Level SDLC is a universal four step process consisting of the following:
Analysis is generally preceded by a preliminary investigation and is a bit different than identifying it. Instead of just listing the problem, this phase focuses on what the problem is as well as the final expectations. It also provides the designer an opportunity to review the logistics, economics, operational and technological aspects of the software/system.
Planning is broken down into two sub-phases, the Scheduling and Design. “These phases operate in parallel and necessitate repetition” (Moore, Nolan, Gillard 2006). The Planning Phase is an integral part of the SDLC. The project team can use this time to identify all the options available to resolve the problem faced and choose the one the best fits into the scheme. After that portion of the phase has been completed, then the actual design of the project can move forward. During the design phases, flaws in the original plan may appear an require minor adjustments.
Implementation “is the third phase of the SDLC and, as with design, there are two sub-phases: construction and deployment. However, unlike implementation, these sub-phases do not operate concurrently and could conceivably be considered individual phases” (Moore, Nolan, Gillard 2006). This can sometimes be the most frustrating phase of a project because this is when the actual “change” occurs. In this phase of the project, the solutions agreed upon in the previous steps are placed into a test, training and production platform. After some time of use, the
Your Name
University of Phoenix
SDLC Methodology
The Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) is a business practice used by many companies/corporations and serves as a guideline for developing systems & software. To understand how the SDLC can be either beneficial or detrimental to any system designer, we must first understand what the SDLC is and how it applies. The Higher Level SDLC is a universal four step process consisting of the following:
Analysis is generally preceded by a preliminary investigation and is a bit different than identifying it. Instead of just listing the problem, this phase focuses on what the problem is as well as the final expectations. It also provides the designer an opportunity to review the logistics, economics, operational and technological aspects of the software/system.
Planning is broken down into two sub-phases, the Scheduling and Design. “These phases operate in parallel and necessitate repetition” (Moore, Nolan, Gillard 2006). The Planning Phase is an integral part of the SDLC. The project team can use this time to identify all the options available to resolve the problem faced and choose the one the best fits into the scheme. After that portion of the phase has been completed, then the actual design of the project can move forward. During the design phases, flaws in the original plan may appear an require minor adjustments.
Implementation “is the third phase of the SDLC and, as with design, there are two sub-phases: construction and deployment. However, unlike implementation, these sub-phases do not operate concurrently and could conceivably be considered individual phases” (Moore, Nolan, Gillard 2006). This can sometimes be the most frustrating phase of a project because this is when the actual “change” occurs. In this phase of the project, the solutions agreed upon in the previous steps are placed into a test, training and production platform. After some time of use, the
References: William Moore, Ernest Nolan, Sharlett Gillard. (2006). Towards a Higher-Level Systems Development Life Cycle, with Universal Applications. International Journal of Management,2 23(3), 646-652. Retrieved June 17, 2009, from ProQuest database.