Comparing and Contrasting Development Methods One of the first development decisions made during a project implementation is what type of method should be used. The two most basic and often used methods are the Waterfall and Agile Method. For this assignment I will compare and contrast these two methodologies, discuss how I could apply them to my own company and talk about which method I think will be more valuable. The Waterfall Method is a linear approach to development. As Williams explains, there are five sequential stages in this method: analyzing requirements, designing the system, development the system, testing the system and deploying it. Each stage of this development model needs to be completed before the next one can begin. …show more content…
Our organization focuses on being efficient and keeping the cost of healthcare as low as possible. We work to improve value and we have to take into consideration both our patients and our providers. To remain competitive we are always developing and planning new IT projects to align our initiatives with our mission. In my setting, where customer service (patients) is the key, a combination of both approaches would be better. In an ideal situation I would combine both the Waterfall and Agile Methods. I would build my project on the Waterfall Method but build the software with the Agile model. This would allow for us to keep the best of both models. The Agile Method could help my organization in a number of ways. As a health care organization we deal with a large volume of data to help us control cost (scalability). Due to federal regulations on healthcare we need to remain compliant at all times. The Agile method would allow for us to make incremental steps to achieve an application that meets our customers’ expectations. By using a hybrid model you could use the documentation requirements in the Waterfall Model which would allow us to remain complaint by ensuring we have meet all the requirements of both the state and federal government. With the Agile method we would have the ability to adapt to new standards easily without incurring a great deal of cost along the