RECONSIDERATION AND PROPOSAL OF DEVELOPMENT MODELS IN PROJECTS - “QUASI” DEVELOPMENT MODELS: QUASI-WATERFALL AND QUASI-AGILE

Takaaki Fujita

Abstract


Diverse development models, including waterfall development, iterative development, and agile development, have been put forth and implemented across real-world contexts. When engaging in discussions on project management, the examination and exploration of development models assume paramount importance and are integral. This paper embarks upon an investigation and scrutiny of these development models, culminating in the proposition of "Quasi" Development Models: Quasi-Waterfall and Quasi-Agile.

 

Article visualizations:

Hit counter


Keywords


waterfall development, agile development, hybrid development, development models

Full Text:

PDF

References


Morimoto, S. (2007). Support research and challenges towards practicalization in software development processes. Journal of the Graduate School for Advanced Studies in Industrial Technology, 1, 105-110.

Sakamoto, N. (2010). Agile development that brings happiness: Differentiating from waterfall development. Nikkei Computer, 749, 120-123.

Homma, M. (2014). Limitations of waterfall development and expectations for evolutionary prototype development. System/Control/Information, 58(6), 227-232.

Dohi, R. (2012). Why is prototype development not adopted in government IT procurement? Abstracts of the Spring National Conference of the Japan Society of Information and Management, 262.

DOD-STD-2167A, Military Standard: Defense System Software Development. United States Department of Defense. 29 Feb 1988.

Agile Manifesto. (nd.). Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Retrieved from http://agilemanifesto.org/iso/ja/manifesto.html

Yatsumi, T., & Kitachuu, H. (2019). Consideration on the structural changes brought about by "design thinking" in IT system development. Abstracts of the Spring National Conference of the Japan Society of Information and Management, 185-188.

Furuta, M. (2015). Application of agile development methods in the development of core business systems in the finance and insurance industries. Fujitsu, 66(3), 63-68.

Yoshida, C. (2015). Study on estimation and contract models for agile development. PhD Paper, University of Tsukuba.

Yamane, S. (2011). Theory and practice of game development in higher education: Using Global Game Jam as an example. Research Reports on Computers and Education, 2011(5), 1-6.

Oba, M. (2018). Globalization of the economy and the necessity of agile development. Economic Science Studies, 21(1-2), 129-156.

Petersen, Kai, Claes Wohlin, and Dejan Baca (2009). The waterfall model in large-scale development. Product-Focused Software Process Improvement: 10th International Conference, PROFES 2009, Oulu, Finland, June 15-17, 2009. Proceedings 10. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.

McCormick, Mike (2012). Waterfall vs. Agile methodology, MPCS, N/A 3

Balaji, Sundramoorthy, and M. Sundararajan Murugaiyan (2012). Waterfall vs. V-Model vs. Agile: A comparative study on SDLC. International Journal of Information Technology and Business Management 2.1: 26-30.

Dima, Alina Mihaela, and Maria Alexandra Maassen (2018). From Waterfall to Agile software: Development models in the IT sector, 2006 to 2018. Impacts on company management. Journal of International Studies (2071-8330) 11.2 (2018).

Belling, Shawn (2020). Succeeding with Agile Hybrids: Project Delivery Using Hybrid Methodologies. Apress.

Mahadevan, Lakshman, William J. Kettinger, and Thomas O. Meservy (2015). Running on hybrid: Control changes when introducing an agile methodology in a traditional “waterfall” system development environment. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 36.15.

Schuh, Günther, et al. (2017). Agile-waterfall hybrid product development in the manufacturing industry—Introducing guidelines for implementation of parallel use of the two models. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM). IEEE.

Reiff, Janine, and Dennis Schlegel (2022). Hybrid project management–a systematic literature review. International journal of information systems and project management 10.2 45-63.

Yahya, Norzariyah, and Siti Sarah Maidin (2022). The Waterfall Model with Agile Scrum as the Hybrid Agile Model for the Software Engineering Team. 2022 10th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management (CITSM). IEEE, 2022.

Stoica, Marian, et al. (2016). Analyzing agile development-from waterfall style to Scrumban. Informatica Economica 20.4 (2016): 5.

Mishra, Alok, and Yehia Ibrahim Alzoubi (2023). Structured software development versus agile software development: a comparative analysis. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management (2023): 1-19.

Jangra, Keshav, Simran Yadav, and Vimmi Malhotra (2023). Optimizing The Product Development Process for Speed to Market, Quality, And Customer Satisfaction: A Comparative Study of Agile and Waterfall Methodologies. International Research Journal of Modernization in Engineering Technology and Science, 5(4), Retrieved from https://www.irjmets.com/uploadedfiles/paper/issue_4_april_2023/36854/final/fin_irjmets1682413432.pdf

Dursun, Mehtap, and Nazli Goker (2022). Evaluation of project management methodologies success factors using fuzzy cognitive map method: waterfall, agile, and lean six sigma cases. International Journal of Intelligent Systems and Applications in Engineering 10.1: 35-43.

Kodmelwar, Manohar K., et al. (2022). A comparative study of software development waterfall, spiral, and agile methodology. Journal of Positive School Psychology 6.3 (2022): 7013-7017.

Clear, Tony (2003). The waterfall is dead... long live the waterfall!!." ACM SIGCSE Bulletin 35.4: 13-14.

Yang, Fangkun (2013). How to Migrate from Waterfall. Development Approach to Agile Approach.

Van Casteren, Wilfred (2017). The Waterfall Model and the Agile Methodologies: A comparison by project characteristics. Research Gate 2: 1-6.

Stoica, Marian, Marinela Mircea, and Bogdan Ghilic-Micu (2013). Software development: agile vs. traditional. Informatica Economica 17.4.

Fitzgerald, Brian, Nancy L. Russo, and Tom O'Kane (2003). Software development method tailoring at Motorola. Communications of the ACM 46.4: 64-70.

Sharma, Sheetal, Darothi Sarkar, and Divya Gupta (2012). Agile processes and methodologies: A conceptual study. International journal on computer science and Engineering 4.5: 892.

Mohanarangam, Karthik (2020). Transitioning to agile—in a large organization. IT Professional 22.2: 67-72.

Salnikov, Nikita (2021). How software development methodologies affect dynamic capabilities under extreme contexts: a COVID-19 study on agile and waterfall methodologies. MS thesis

Gheorghe, Alina-Mădălina, Ileana Daniela Gheorghe, and Ioana Laura Iatan (2020). Agile Software Development. Informatica Economica, 24.2

Liu, Tong (2022). Application of Agile Project Management in Software R&D Management of M Enterprise. Frontiers in Computing and Intelligent Systems 1.3: 85-87.

Khoza, Lucas T., and Carl Marnewick (2020). Waterfall and agile information system project success rates-a South African perspective. South African Computer Journal 32.1: 43-73.

Kettunen, Janne, and Miguel A. Lejeune (2020). Waterfall and agile product development approaches: Disjunctive stochastic programming formulations. Operations Research 68.5: 1356-1363.

Kettunen, Janne, and Miguel A. Lejeune (2020). Waterfall and agile product development approaches: Disjunctive stochastic programming formulations. Operations Research 68.5: 1356-1363.

Mousaei, T. M. (2020). Review on Role of Quality Assurance in Waterfall and Agile Software Development. Journal of Software Engineering & Intelligent Systems 5 (20.

Farahat, Abdallah Magdy, and Domenico Defina (2022). Novel Adaptive Approach for Applying and Combining Traditional Waterfall and Agile Project Management Methodologies. Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference. SPE.

Ben-zahia, Mehemed Abdusalam Omer, Ali Aburas, and Miloud Ghawar (2022). The Challenges of Software Development: Waterfall and Agile. Libyan International Conference for Applied Science and Engineering.

Maslyuk, O. O., and K. A. Alekseieva (2019). Differences between Waterfall and Agile Project Management. Збірник Матеріалів: 81.

Chan, Lok Shan (2020). Selection of Waterfall and Agile Methodologies in Software Testing.

Fagarasan, C., et al. (2021). Agile, waterfall, and iterative approach in information technology projects. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. Vol. 1169. No. 1. IOP Publishing.

Mishra, Alok, and Yehia Ibrahim Alzoubi (2023). Structured software development versus agile software development: a comparative analysis. International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management: 1-19.

Giavarina, Giacomo (2021). Analysis of a hybrid project management approach between Waterfall and Agile. Case study in the European automotive sector. Diss. Politecnico di Torino.

Kikui, Takahiro (2023). Sequential decision making for specification changes during system development Comparing Waterfall and Agile Method." Abstracts of Annual Conference of Japan Society for Management Information Annual Conference of Japan Society for Management Information 2022. The Japan Society for Management Information (JASMIN), 2023.

Bengdara, Hamdy (2021). Hybrid Approaches of Project Management.

Wankhede, Rashmi (2016). Hybrid Agile Approach: Efficiently Blending Traditional and Agile Methodologies.

Tip, Plaky Pro. "What is hybrid project management?."

Fujita, T. (2023). Revitalizing Education Through ICT: A Short Overview of Japan's Current Landscape. European Journal of Social Sciences Studies, 8(5).

Fujita, T. (2023). Breaking Down Barriers: Proposals for Overcoming Challenges in Student Project Management. European Journal of Management and Marketing Studies, 8(2).




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejsss.v9i2.1575

Copyright (c) 2023 Takaaki Fujita

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The research works published in this journal are free to be accessed. They can be shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format) and\or adapted (remixed, transformed, and built upon the material for any purpose, commercially and\or not commercially) under the following terms: attribution (appropriate credit must be given indicating original authors, research work name and publication name mentioning if changes were made) and without adding additional restrictions (without restricting others from doing anything the actual license permits). Authors retain the full copyright of their published research works and cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the license terms are followed.

Copyright © 2016 - 2023. European Journal Of Social Sciences Studies (ISSN 2501-8590) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library. All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and standards formulated by Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002), the Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing (2003) and  Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities (2003) and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Copyrights of the published research works are retained by authors.