Waterfall vs Agile Devlopment
Waterfall vs Agile Development
A Director of IT Programs at a large Aerospace Defense contracting company has been asked to develop a financial system that allows the Program Managers for the company to do their Earned Value Analysis. The development of this system will allow the company to manage their programs more efficiently and maintain the Government certification of their Earned Value systems. If the company loses their certification the government can withhold 5% of their profits on a yearly basis.
The development of this system can be done in the traditional waterfall method or in a newer agile methodology. It is important to develop the system within the next year, as there will be an audit by the government and this system will have to meet the functionality and standards that the government sets in order for the company to maintain their certification. In the past, the company has used the waterfall methodology and at the end of development there have been significant lags in the expected delivery time and the actual delivery time. Many times there is more development needed after the end of the project because the customer have felt that they did not get what they asked for. The Director has been given a choice of using the traditional waterfall methodology or go with the new agile methodology which allows for a more flexible iteration in development and has been proven to meet customer needs in the end of development more often than waterfall.
1. Who is making the bad decision? The IT Director has been working with waterfall methodology which does not meet schedule most of the time. This allows for schedule slippage and increased cost.
2. Does the Director have enough information to make a good decision? No. The Director knows that they need to develop a solution in 12 months or the company may be penalized 5% of their profits, but is uncertain if either methodology will meet the 12 month deadline.
3. And then incentive to do so? Yes.
A Director of IT Programs at a large Aerospace Defense contracting company has been asked to develop a financial system that allows the Program Managers for the company to do their Earned Value Analysis. The development of this system will allow the company to manage their programs more efficiently and maintain the Government certification of their Earned Value systems. If the company loses their certification the government can withhold 5% of their profits on a yearly basis.
The development of this system can be done in the traditional waterfall method or in a newer agile methodology. It is important to develop the system within the next year, as there will be an audit by the government and this system will have to meet the functionality and standards that the government sets in order for the company to maintain their certification. In the past, the company has used the waterfall methodology and at the end of development there have been significant lags in the expected delivery time and the actual delivery time. Many times there is more development needed after the end of the project because the customer have felt that they did not get what they asked for. The Director has been given a choice of using the traditional waterfall methodology or go with the new agile methodology which allows for a more flexible iteration in development and has been proven to meet customer needs in the end of development more often than waterfall.
1. Who is making the bad decision? The IT Director has been working with waterfall methodology which does not meet schedule most of the time. This allows for schedule slippage and increased cost.
2. Does the Director have enough information to make a good decision? No. The Director knows that they need to develop a solution in 12 months or the company may be penalized 5% of their profits, but is uncertain if either methodology will meet the 12 month deadline.
3. And then incentive to do so? Yes.