System Development Methodology for Bachelor of Information Technology

This report discusses the system development methodology for designing a software system for the Bachelor of Information Technology program. It compares the modified waterfall model and extreme programming and provides a project Gantt chart and economic cost feasibility analysis.

Running head: BACHELOR OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Bachelor of Information Technology
Name of Student
Name of University
Author Note

1
Table of Contents
Task 1: System Development Methodology........................................................................2
1.1. Description of Both the Model.................................................................................2
1.1.1. Modified Waterfall Model.................................................................................2
1.1.2. Extreme Programming.......................................................................................3
1.2. Comparison between Modified Waterfall and XP....................................................4
Task 2: Project Gantt chart..................................................................................................6
Task 3: Economic Cost Feasibility/Project Budgeting......................................................10
3.1. Excel.......................................................................................................................10
3.2. Breakeven Period....................................................................................................13
3.2.1. Breakeven Period Definition...........................................................................13
3.2.2. Different types of Values Obtained from the Project......................................13
3.2.3. Values to the Customer....................................................................................14
3.3. Return on Investment..............................................................................................15
3.3.1. ROI..................................................................................................................15
3.3.2. Value of ROI in the project.............................................................................15
3.3.3. Project is worthwhile Investment....................................................................15
References..........................................................................................................................16

2
Part B: Case Study Solar Power
Task 1: System Development Methodology
This section of the report will be identifying the system development methodology that
can be employed for designing a software system. This section of the report will be comparing
two methods of software implementation, which are modified waterfall model and extreme
programming.
1.1. Description of Both the Model
The following section provides a brief description of Modified waterfall model and
extreme programming.
1.1.1. Modified Waterfall Model
Modified waterfall model is an advanced version of the traditional waterfall model and
therefore, make use of almost similar phases as that of the pure waterfall model. A modified
waterfall model solves a number of problem that is faced by the traditional waterfall model
(Datyal 2015). The traditional waterfall model was gradually becoming redundant due to its
limitations. The modified waterfall model helps in eliminating those limitations. The phases of
modified waterfall model is indicated in the figure below-

3
Figure 1: Representing the phases of Modified Waterfall Model
(Source: Velmourougan et al. 2014)
One of the most basis advantage of modified waterfall model is that it is quite flexible in
comparison to the traditional waterfall model.
1.1.2. Extreme Programming
Extreme Programming (XP), is an agile software development framework or process.
This particular software development method aims in producing a software of high quality
(Salah, Paige and Cairns 2014). Thus, this framework is mainly used to improve the quality and

4
the responsiveness of the software that is being developed. One of the most basic advantages of
XP is that it enables the software companies in saving a subsequent amount of cost and time
required for project implementation.
1.2. Comparison between Modified Waterfall and XP
The differences between Modified waterfall method and XP method is indicated in the
table below-
Characteristics Modified Waterfall Extreme Programming
Definition Modified waterfall make use
of same phase as that of
traditional waterfall model
It is an agile software
development process. This
approach is mainly based on
delivery of the software in
small increments (Matharu et
al. 2015).
Advantages The main advantage of
Modified waterfall model is
that the model is very simple
to use and each phase of
modified waterfall model has
specific deliverables
The main advantage of
extreme programming model
is that this particular method
is associated with small
releases that helps in delivery
of an advanced product
(Turk, France and Rumpe
2014)
Disadvantages The disadvantage of Modified The disadvantage is that, this

5
waterfall model is that the
milestone associated with this
software development
process is quite ambiguous.
process makes it difficult to
scale up the project in
implementation of large
projects.

6
Task 2: Project Gantt chart
Gantt chart prepared for the project mainly illustrates the scheduling activities in a project
(Gantt 2015). Online solar power system project is a short scale project that aims in development
of an online website. The design and implementation stage of the website developed in
scheduled using MS project. The Gantt chart formed as a part of the project scheduling activity is
indicated in the following picture-

7
Figure 2: Representing the Gantt chart of the Project
The above figure indicates the sequencing activities and the tasks that are needed to be
performed in the online solar power system project. The entire project is completed with a team
of four members. The resources column indicates the details of the member appointed for the
task and the role that member is being assigned for. The duration column indicates the time
needed to complete the specific task. The predecessor column gives an idea of the sequence
followed in task execution (Schwalbe 2015). This schedule is prepared based on certain
assumptions, which indicated in the following paragraphs.
Assumptions: The major assumptions associated with the project are as follows-
1. It is assumed that the planning and the analysis phase of the project are already
completed and therefore, the Gantt chart is prepared with a special focus on implementation
phase and the testing phases associated with the Online Solar Power System project.
2. The entire project is being executed with a team of 4 members. It is assumed that no
team member will play two roles at the same time. The resources allocation in the Gantt chart is
indicated in the table below-
Task Name Duration Resource Names
Online Solar Power System 207 days
Project Starts 0 days Member 1_Project Manager
Initiation Phase 17 days
Analysing the
requirements gathered in the
planning phase
5 days Member 1_Project Manager ,Member 2_Resource
Manager
Estimating the resources
needed 2 days Member 2_Resource Manager
Development of the Plan
for Website Development 7 days Member 1_Project Manager ,Member 4_Technical
Manager
Documentation 3 days Documentation Cost[1],Member 1_Document

8
Manager
Milestone 1: Approval of
the Plan 0 days Member 1_Project Manager
Implementation Phase 102 days
Understanding the Website
Requirements 5 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4_Technical
Manager
Setting up the Project
Team 2 days Member 1_Project Manager
Designing the Website 20 days
Interface designing 15 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
Approval of the Design 5 days Member 1_Business Analyst
Coding 75 days
Coding starts 30 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
Coding database 30 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
Linking with the
database 15 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
Milestone 2: Completion
of Coding the Website 0 days Member 4_Technical Manager
Testing Phase 62 days
System Testing 7 days Member 2_Tester ,Member 4_Technical Manager
Alpha Testing 10 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
Beta Testing 15 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
User Acceptability Testing 15 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
Identification of Bugs 5 days Member 3_Tester
Bug Fixation 10 days Member 2_Programmer,Member 4-Coder
Milestone 3: Completion
of the Testing Phase 0 days Member 4_Technical Manager
Launching Phase 14 days
Preparation of the Website
Launch 5 days Member 1_Project Manager
Advertising 7 days Member1_Advertiser,Advertising Cost[1]
Website Launch 2 days Member 1_Project Manager ,Member 3_Project
Superisor
Milestone 4: Completion
of Website Launch 0 days Member 1_Project Manager
Evaluation Phase 12 days
Project evaluation 7 days Member 3_Project Superisor
Documentation 2 days Documentation Cost[1],Member 1_Document
Manager
Payment Completion 2 days Member 1_Project Manager
Client Sign Off 1 day Member 1_Project Manager
Milestone 5: Project Ends 0 days Member 1_Project Manager

9
The above table indicates that no team members are playing more than one role at a time.
It is assumed that the tasks are executed in a sequential manner to eliminate the issues of
resource clash.
3. It is assumed that the coding phase of the website will involve the specification of
automatic report generation within the system.
4. A calendar of 5 working days a week and 8 hours working time is assumed in
preparation of the Gantt chart.

10
Task 3: Economic Cost Feasibility/Project Budgeting
3.1. Excel
The Online solar power system project deals with development of an online website that
will link the potential customers to the services offered by Bob Sparks. The initial investment
cost of the project $25,000 and the recurring cost of the project is $7,500. A financial analysis of
the project has been estimated with an expected discount rate of 11%. The time period for
estimation of the business case is 5-Year period. The forecasted benefits that is assumed for this
project is $30,000, $35,000, $40,000, $45,000 and $50,000 throughout the period of 5 years. The
cost benefit analysis of the project is indicated in the table below-

11
Cost/Benefit Analysis for Solar Power Project
Year of Project
year 0 year1 year 2 year 3 year 4 year 5 TOTALS
Net economic benefit $0.00 $30,000.00 $35,000.00 $40,000.00 $45,000.00 $50,000.00
Discount Rate 11% 1 0.9009 0.8116 0.7312 0.6587 0.5935
PV Of Benefits $0.00 $27,027.03 $28,406.79 $29,247.66 $29,642.89 $29,672.57
NPV of all BENEFITS $0.00 $27,027.03 $55,433.81 $84,681.47 $1,14,324.36 $1,43,996.93 $4,25,463.57
One Time Costs $25,000.00
Recurring Costs $0.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00
Discount Rate 11% 1.0000 0.9009 0.8116 0.7312 0.6587 0.5935
PV Of Recurring Costs $0.00 $6,756.76 $6,087.17 $5,483.94 $4,940.48 $4,450.88
NPV Of All Costs $25,000.00 $31,756.76 $37,843.93 $43,327.86 $48,268.34 $52,719.23 $2,38,916.12
Overall NPV $1,86,547.45
Overall ROI = (Overall NPV / NPV Of All Costs 0.78
Break-Even Analysis
Yearly NPV Cash Flow $0.00 $20,270.27 $22,319.62 $23,763.72 $24,702.41 $25,221.68
Overall NPV Cash Flow $25,000.00 ($4,729.73) $17,589.89 $41,353.61 $66,056.02 $91,277.70

12
Project break-even occurs between years 1 and 2
(22319.62-17589.89)/22319.62 = 0.2119
1 year + 77 days (0.211*365)
OR
1.211 year
Table 1: Representing the cost benefit Analysis of the Online Solar Power System Project
(Source: Data Based)

13

14
3.2. Breakeven Period
3.2.1. Breakeven Period Definition
The breakeven period is mainly defined as the period in which, the total expenses of a
particular project equals to the total revenue (Johansson and Kriström 2018). In simple words,
the breakeven period of a project is the time required for the net cash flow to offset the cost of
the project.
The data from the table 1 indicates that the breakeven for the project occurs between year
1 and year 2. The data obtained from the calculated financial analysis indicates that breakeven is
occurring in 1.2 years (1 year 77 days).
Project break-even occurs between years 1 and 2
(22319.62-17589.89)/22319.62 = 0.2119
1 year + 77 days (0.211*365)
OR
1.211 year
Figure 3: Representing calculated breakeven of the online solar power system project
3.2.2. Different types of Values Obtained from the Project
The financial analysis of the chosen project involves estimation of a number of types of
values associated with the project. The cost benefit analysis indicates the net present value
(NPV) of the project, benefits, recurring costs, the return of Investment (ROI) and the breakeven
period.

15
Cost/Benefit Analysis for Solar Power Project
Year of Project
year 0 year1 year 2 year 3 year 4 year 5 TOTALS
Net economic benefit $0.00 $30,000.00 $35,000.00 $40,000.00 $45,000.00 $50,000.00
Discount Rate 11% 1 0.9009 0.8116 0.7312 0.6587 0.5935
PV Of Benefits $0.00 $27,027.03 $28,406.79 $29,247.66 $29,642.89 $29,672.57
NPV of all BENEFITS $0.00 $27,027.03 $55,433.81 $84,681.47 $1,14,324.36 $1,43,996.93 $4,25,463.57
One Time Costs $25,000.00
Recurring Costs $0.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00 $7,500.00
Discount Rate 11% 1.0000 0.9009 0.8116 0.7312 0.6587 0.5935
PV Of Recurring Costs $0.00 $6,756.76 $6,087.17 $5,483.94 $4,940.48 $4,450.88
NPV Of All Costs $25,000.00 $31,756.76 $37,843.93 $43,327.86 $48,268.34 $52,719.23 $2,38,916.12
Overall NPV $1,86,547.45
Overall ROI = (Overall NPV / NPV Of All Costs 0.78
Break-Even Analysis
Yearly NPV Cash Flow $0.00 $20,270.27 $22,319.62 $23,763.72 $24,702.41 $25,221.68
Overall NPV Cash Flow $25,000.00 ($4,729.73) $17,589.89 $41,353.61 $66,056.02 $91,277.70
Project break-even occurs between years 1 and 2
(22319.62-17589.89)/22319.62 = 0.2119
1 year + 77 days (0.211*365)
OR
1.211 year
Figure 4: Representing the different types of values obtained for the Project
3.2.3. Values to the Customer
The breakeven of a company indicates that a company’s sales revenue must be equal to
the total expenses of the company. Therefore, the breakeven point is descried as the point in
which the sales revenue equals to the actual cost of the project (Newcomer, Hatry and Wholey
2015). Therefore, the breakeven point generally has high values to the customer as a smaller
breakeven period indicates that the project is profitable (Nas 2016). The break even analysis
helps the clients to decide whether a particular project is worth investing or not. Considering this

16
particular project, the breakeven point of the project is found to occur between year 1 and year 2.
Therefore, the customers will be benefited by the project along with the project investors. The
financial analysis indicates that the project is financially feasible and therefore can be executed
effectively.
3.3. Return on Investment
3.3.1. ROI
The return of investment or ROI is considered to be a performance measure that is mainly
used to evaluate whether a particular investment is efficient or not. The ROI mainly calculates
the amount of return of a project (Žižlavský 2014). Therefore, calculation of ROI in the project is
essential to judge is financial viability.
3.3.2. Value of ROI in the project
ROI has a high value in the project as it helps in determining the financial viability of the
project. The ROI is quite important to let the customer know about the value of the project and
whether investing in the project will yield successful return (Reading 2016.). The Online solar
power system project is has a positive ROI and therefore the project can be undertaken without
any issue.
3.3.3. Project is worthwhile Investment
Calculation of the ROI of a project helps in identifying whether a project is worthwhile
investment. This is because ROI is generally calculated on basis of the benefit of an investment.
The obtained benefit should be greater than the cost of the project to ensure a positive ROI. The
financial analysis of the online solar power system project indicates that it has positive ROI.

17
References
Datyal, D., 2015. Proposed Model to Overcome the Problems in Waterfall Model. vol, 2, pp.29-
32.
Gantt, H., 2015. Gantt chart.
Johansson, P.O. and Kriström, B., 2018. Cost-benefit analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Matharu, G.S., Mishra, A., Singh, H. and Upadhyay, P., 2015. Empirical study of agile software
development methodologies: A comparative analysis. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering
Notes, 40(1), pp.1-6.
Nas, T.F., 2016. Cost-benefit analysis: Theory and application. Lexington Books.
Newcomer, K.E., Hatry, H.P. and Wholey, J.S., 2015. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit
analysis. Handbook of practical program evaluation, p.636.
Reading, S.S., 2016. Investment Analysis. Instructor.
Salah, D., Paige, R.F. and Cairns, P., 2014, May. A systematic literature review for agile
development processes and user centred design integration. In Proceedings of the 18th
international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering (p. 5). ACM.
Schwalbe, K., 2015. Information technology project management. Cengage Learning.
Turk, D., France, R. and Rumpe, B., 2014. Limitations of agile software processes. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1409.6600.

18
Velmourougan, S., Dhavachelvan, P., Baskaran, R. and Ravikumar, B., 2014, August. Software
development life cycle model to improve maintainability of software applications. In 2014
Fourth International Conference on Advances in Computing and Communications (pp. 270-273).
IEEE.
Žižlavský, O., 2014. Net present value approach: method for economic assessment of innovation
projects. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 156, pp.506-512.