Which of the following best describes the waterfall method software development strategy?

As digital is now embedded into every sector of business, software development is no longer siloed. Rather, it requires input from all parts of an organization. For team members with minimal technological experience, the process can be extremely challenging, while companies may find it costly and difficult to bring together ideas and concepts from different departments.

When embarking on a software development project, the team generally has an objective in mind, as well as a vague idea of how to reach it. Of course, this is not enough; to ensure success a framework is needed, a set of processes and protocols which will take the project from ‘Point A’ through to successful completion. Keeping stakeholders engaged with the process and informed of the outcome is vital.

First-hand experience has taught me the importance of adopting a robust development methodology and ensuring all involved understand the parameters of the process. Each phase of the developmental journey can be mapped out along this workflow. The course from the conception of an idea to the launch of a realized product is laid down from the beginning. This framework provides and guides all stakeholders with clarity.

There are conflicting schools of thought regarding which framework provides the best results. The most prominent are the Waterfall methodology and the Agile methodology. So, what is Waterfall and what is Agile? And which one will work best for your project?”

What Is the Waterfall Methodology?

Waterfall methodology is the simpler of the two concepts, referring to the rigid following of a set plan with no deviation from this path. Waterfall workflows are borrowed directly from the models utilized in construction and manufacture and usually begin with the conception phase, followed by the planning phase. Then comes the refinement of the plan, outlining the practical steps, putting these practical steps into practice, testing, and, implementation. Some models will work another phase into the Waterfall process, that of ongoing maintenance and analysis.

The structure is a basic one. Once each section is completed, the development team move onto the next one. There is no backward or lateral motion, only forward progression as the team continues along the track towards the completed software product.

The advantage of this is that the framework is very simple to follow. Teams can analyze quickly and easily where they are and what step must come next. For an organization with a relatively low level of resources, this can provide a serious benefit as it keeps budgets and expectations stable.

However, change is a reality during any project. With this in mind, a severe disadvantage of the Waterfall method is that there is no way to navigate backward through the framework. If a mistake is made, or a new and improved idea of technology becomes available, once the phase is completed and signed off, the only way to effect change is to scrap the entire project and begin again. This can be catastrophic for the development team and the continuity of the project.

Advantages Outline for the Waterfall System

• Straightforward sequential processes
• Manageable for organizations with relatively low resource levels
• Process can be planned and laid out effectively after initial planning phase, which means management does not need to be so heavily involved throughout the rest of the process
• No nasty surprises in terms of financial cost, team members needed, or resources used, provided that each phase is completed to a satisfactory degree
• Timelines and cost can be quickly and effectively communicated to shareholders and clients, again providing that there is no error at any stage
• Suitable for quickly developing add-ons or tie-ins for existing projects, in which results can be predicted with relative accuracy

Disadvantages Outline for the Waterfall System

• The project cannot be easily rolled back in the event that a bug or other issue is detected within the software after the relevant phase is completed
• Provides little or no room for innovation during the development project, as all phases must be planned beforehand and each section must be meticulously assessed
• For wholly new projects, without previously tried and tested outcomes, preliminary planning is key, which can stall the project
• If a problem is detected after a phase is completed, the entire project must be started over
• Savings in terms of cost, time and resources can be canceled out if there are any problems during the process
• The Waterfall method does not account for unexpected issues or parameters which may not have been detected during initial planning

What Is Agile Methodology?

Agile methodology originated as a direct response to the inflexible nature of the existing system. Whereas the Waterfall method relies on meticulous planning from the very beginning and is conducted in a wholly sequential manner, the Agile method is more adaptable and less rigid.

At the initial phase of the development project, the team is armed with only a skeletal design, which is built upon and fleshed out as the process continues. The team then works on specific modules of the project, developing it in sprints. The objective of each sprint is not necessarily planned well in advance but is instead formulated in response to earlier testing.

When each sprint is completed, testing can take place to check for any bugs or other issues, and then the objectives for the next sprint can be outlined. This continues until the software is fully developed.

Beta testing and other public evaluation initiatives can be incorporated into the development process. Teams can respond to the results of such evaluations and build them into the final software architecture. To describe the methodology in simple terms; the Agile process lives up to its name as teams can be flexible to the needs of the project as they develop, and enjoy more freedom to be innovative and to use intuition during the process.

Advantages Outline for the Agile Method

• Problems can be identified and ironed out with minimal disruption to the project as a whole
• Teams are freer to follow intuitive pathways during development and to use initiative and innovation to achieve the right result
• Minimal planning needs to take place beforehand, which means that the project gets underway quickly with very little delay
• It is possible that we will not know about problems ahead of time; the Agile method helps teams to catch these problems when they occur
• The Agile method is suitable for getting an idea up and running quickly, as the iterative nature allows the project to be rolled out in modules.
• The Agile method enables developers to amass funding incrementally, carrying out and assessing each developmental sprint as and when necessary

Disadvantages Outline for the Agile Method

• Time scale and cost can rapidly get out of hand
• Developers also do not know how many staff they will require, or the volume of resources needed to get the project off the ground
• While the project begins more quickly, it could potentially stall midway through
• No defined long-term outcome can make development difficult
• Developers working on projects with tried and tested outcomes may find the Waterfall model to be more effective
• There is danger that the team could head off on a tangent that does not fulfill initial needs, unless properly

The Hybrid Alternative

Whether the Waterfall or the Agile developmental methodology is best for a project hinges on a number of factors. If you are working with a team that is keen to break new ground and push, the Agile methodology allows for exceptional outcomes. This model is also suitable for teams who are deeply committed to ongoing development and funding an a management level.

On the other hand, if guaranteed cost is the highest consideration and the scope of the project is very clear with easily measurable outcomes, the Waterfall method will prove to be the more reliable. The Waterfall method is particularly suitable for management teams that do not have the time or knowledge to follow the new trends and coding outcomes closely.

Previously, conventional wisdom stated that a hybrid of such different methodologies was not possible. However, a compromise between the two polar opposite concepts can retain the free-thinking, highly innovative elements of the Agile model while still tempering this with the discipline and structure of the Waterfall method.

Like all collaborative projects, the hybrid model requires good team communication and a real willingness for inter-department partnerships. Ideally, the project is overseen by managers and supervisors who deploy a Waterfall framework with a wider perspective. This enables them to set clear KPI’s for each phase and make predictions in terms of cost and timeframe. 

This timeline provides management surety, and non-coding stakeholders, such as those with backgrounds in sales or marketing, can cooperate in a coordinated fashion. Meanwhile, development teams operate on a basis similar to that of the Agile model, facilitating short feature sprints, inline testing, evaluation and flexibility within the framework.

This approach requires a robust management protocol if it is to be implemented effectively, but allows organizations to achieve all aims in terms of both predictive analysis and innovation. As most organizations are learning all the time, technology is never truly complete. However, the hybrid method provides the ability to reach clear milestones while staying nimble and relevant.