1) The volume of work that was performed;
2) Costs;
3) Time;
4) The quality;
5) The total satisfaction of the project members.
We are obtained a dogma telling us that we have the certain company that has a trend of utilizing the traditional project management methods during a considerable time-lapse and is now looking for the opportunity of ratifying the so-called «agile practices». Let us just look deeper into the phenomenon of such a kind of company’s practices.
In general, agile project management appears to be a repetitive approach that refers to processes of both planning and guiding projects. If we turn to the advantages of this circumstance, the main one will reveal to be an ability to react on distinct aspects or issues that could have been emerged during the whole course of the project.
One should also note that a timely alteration concerning the exact project may lead the company to decrease the amount of money for some special resources and to demonstrate the presence of successful project being the one on time and within budget. Moreover, according to Rouse (2011), “Because agile management relies on the ability to make decisions quickly, it is not suitable for organizations that tend to deliberate over issues for a prolonged period or for those that take decisions to a committee.” It is right to utilize agile models when you feel that your company need some changes. As is also said, this type of models as if gives freedom to those changes.
Agile project management (in terms of product development) is a characterization of the project management methods, which are generally focused on human resources, flexibility, the product itself etc. As Layton (n.d.) mentioned, “Using an agile development model, you still do the same type of work as you would using a traditional waterfall model: You create requirements and designs, you develop your product, and you integrate your product with other products as necessary.”
At the same time, you are to divide your project into iterations that are small issues of the total picture of a project. Their general name is sprints. Let us get to the small comparison of the Waterfall «Traditional Project Management» method and the agile one. If we actually talk about the traditional waterfall development, it must be surely noted that it is possible to go to the next phase when you have already finished the previous one successfully. Thus, the phases we have mentioned earlier have something common with a waterfall. Layton (n.d.) places them according to the next order:
1) Requirements;
2) Design;
3) Development;
4) Integration;
5) Testing;
6) Deployment.
In two separate cases, the way in which a project is going to be released begins with a start and final is release itself. This whole process is accompanied with a risk accumulation. Considering the Agile practices, I would like to highlight the fact that we are able to spectate requirements’ phases only. Still, there are five levels of priority respectively – highest, high, medium, lower, and optional.
In total, I tend to think that the limitations of the exact event can be perceived at the moment the benefits were notified. Consequently, let me introduce some main benefits of the agile approaches. Of course, no one will actually argue with the fact that better quality of a product will be observed in the near time. The concepts of relevance and defining look like key ones in this situation. Sustainable development seems also to be very important as it results in the volume of work completed. Well, out project seems to be the one of a high quality. Sure, this guesswork smoothly brings us to the customer’s issue.
The higher customer redress as if emerged on the surface. In such a way, this kind of people are involved in these projects. To reach this, it is also important to note that every sprint review has to demonstrate the functionality of work performed obligatory. Along with the advantages mentioned above, higher team morale is an inevitable part of the agile practice. Increased project control and tightened collaboration assist in creating better products. Finally, concerning the risk, it is apropos to say that it is reduced now. At all, agile techniques help to avoid any situation that refers to the blooming of the failure of absolute failure.
Now, both the waterfall and the spiral methods are considered to be the most popular models of innovative projects management. The waterfall one, however, is the most used one as it always keep all the phases done worthwhile. The chief limitation of the traditional project management is the necessity of turning back to the phases that had some failures or where some specifications seem important to be made one more time.
Of course, I am a strong adherent to the agile version; still, I cannot but remember the waterfall method can be also very suitable. For instance, when – as Bowes (2014) argues - “where requirements are guaranteed to be unchanging and there is very little uncertainty or if the project if very simple – but those circumstances are becoming fewer and farther between.”
I want to say that if a company needs a constant development and a continuous improvement – the dice is cast. In other words, it is more relevant to use the agile method. However, if you do care having an awesome documentation with a concrete emphasis on the projects investigated, the waterfall method is for you. If you may have understood, the certain situation need the same kind of approach (like any other phenomenon).
In the majority of cases, the head managers are to choose the model the company will run its business further. I totally support this idea, because exactly these people are responsible for company more than anyone more is. Many things also depend on the field of investigations that a company provides. For example, IT-specialized companies wishes to have the waterfall method rather than the agile one. The more responsible work for the society is - the bigger chance to obtain the traditional project management is.
Some recommendations like when it will be better to use and to maintain the waterfall model:
1) The current project seems to be short;
2) The total absence of ambiguous requirements;
3) It is simple to comprehend the main technology;
4) Stability of the product definition;
5) If all the specific requirements are known good and clear, and when they are fixed, it is a perfect time to use this model exactly.
As a small consequence, here we actually have more logic in actions within the organization chosen. I will repeat again that the chance about what model to choose is very delicate and it especially needs much time to be pondered over constructively.
As our globe is connected with the information technologies during our every breathe, it is very important to be updated at any moment, any period of time. I assume that it is fairly understandable that IPv6 is more up-to-date than his IPv4-brother. The first internet protocol is more relevant for the companies now as is obtains more favorable opportunities. I must confess, the complete transition from IPv4 to IPv6 is not possible, unfortunately. This is due to the fact that both of them are incompatible. It will really look like a situation when an old device is using the most modern software or something like that; I mean, the system will not operate as well as the renovated one could. Thus, an enterprise has to think whether to rebuild the whole system or to use both addresses.
If a powerful firm (has some business with the firms representing other countries) has decided to create a new data base, I hardly feel the necessity of using, exempli gratia, the waterfall model here. I would rather pay attention to the staff, which will be responsible for the data transfer from one center to another. Moreover, I tend to think that international business is not an exception for this type.
The last situation refers to the business process reengineering. Frankly, I will utilize the waterfall method here. The main idea is concentrated in the definition of BPR itself. BPR is a phenomenon that makes us to both fundamentally rethink and radically reformat business processes in order to achieve the best effect of any kind of the company’s activity. In addition, documentation is a very substantial link here. In my humble opinion, everything corresponds the key issues of the traditional project management.
References
Rouse, M. (2011). Agile Project Management. SearchCIO: TechTarget. Retrieved from http://searchcio.techtarget.com/definition/Agile-project-management
Layton, M. (n.d.). Comparing Agile Project Management and the Traditional Waterfall Method. Agile Project Management for Dummies. Retrieved from
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/comparing-agile-project-management-and-the- traditi.html
Bowes, J. (2014). Agile vs Waterfall: Comparing Project Management Methods. Manifesto. Retrieved from
https://manifesto.co.uk/agile-vs-waterfall-comparing-project-management-methodologies/
