In class, and after reading Russell Kay’s System Development Life Cycle article, we’ve learned about various System Development Life Cycle (SDLC) approaches including waterfall, agile, fountain, spiral, build and fix, rapid prototyping, incremental, and synchronize and stabilize.
In learning these different approaches, I have come to learn that many companies, including my employer, will use an approach that does not work for their team.
After learning the differences of each of these approaches, I find that the spiral model, which is essentially a series of short waterfall cycles, best describes our as-is project approach. I work for a tax technology company and we are moving at a very rapid pace to keep up with competitors and other disruptors in the market. It is very chaotic at times, especially with the recent Supreme Court of the United States South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. ruling that can and will change how remote sellers are taxed.
I can relate to the CGI/Hubble case because Financials Company moved from a traditional waterfall approach to an agile approach. There are many risks with changing approaching while continually running the business.
The proposal here is that I, as a representative of my employer, need to take a step back and evaluate if this spiral model really works for our team. I see the pros to the agile approach but a huge con is the organizational development team and its lackluster. I have a few questions that will help me brainstorm about my proposal:
• Are you working for a company whose SDLC approach is failing? What is the root-cause of the failure?
• What suggestions can you bring to higher management for recommendations of a more effective approach?
• If your current SDLC approach is working, why is it so successful?