Software Development Methodologies Comparison

This assignment delves into a comparison of different software development methodologies. It examines the feasibility of each approach and explores methods for integrating these methodologies effectively. The provided references offer insights into agile methodologies like Extreme Programming (XP), traditional approaches like SSADM, and other frameworks such as RUP and NIMSAD.

Running head: INFORMATION SYSTEM
Information System
[Name of the Student]
[Name of the University]
[Author note]

2INFORMATION SYSTEM
Table of Contents
Introduction:....................................................................................................................................4
Discussion:.......................................................................................................................................5
Extreme Programming:................................................................................................................5
Steps involved in Extreme Programming (XP):......................................................................5
Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM):......................................................7
Stages involved in SSADM:....................................................................................................7
NIMSAD:..................................................................................................................................10
Comparison between SSADM and Extreme Programming:.................................................10
Problem Situation:.............................................................................................................10
Intended problem solver:...................................................................................................11
Problem solving processes:................................................................................................11
Phase 1: Formulation of the problem.................................................................................12
Stage 1: Understanding of the Situation of the Concern...............................................12
Stage 2: Performing of the diagnosis:............................................................................12
Stage 3: Definition of the progress outline:...................................................................12
Stage 4: Definition of the Problem:...............................................................................13
Stage 5: Derivation of the national system:...................................................................13
Phase 2: Solutions for the design:......................................................................................13
Stage 6: Logical design:.................................................................................................13

3INFORMATION SYSTEM
Phase 3: Design implementation:......................................................................................13
Stage 7: Implementation of the designs:........................................................................13
Conclusion:....................................................................................................................................14
References:....................................................................................................................................15

4INFORMATION SYSTEM
Introduction:
Extreme programming or XP refers to the process of an agile software developing
framework which is aimed at production of a high quality software and a high quality of life for
the team members responsible for the development. XP has proven itself to be one of the very
successful agile process for many small as well as big industries. It becomes successful due to
the fact that it focuses on the matter of customer satisfaction (Ghani and Yasin 2013). SSADM
or Structured System Analysis and Design Method refers to the widely-used computer
application development which is often referred to as the essential requirement for the computing
projects of the government. A framework is provided in such a manner that the process of
managing the project is best suited by the SSADM as it divides the development of the
applications into various modules, stages, steps and tasks. A cascade or waterfall view of the
system is provided by the SSADM (Abdelrahman 2015). NIMSAD is not a methodology but it is
just the ways of finding out what are the elements that are present in the framework and what are
methodologies that are addressed by the framework. NIMSAD helps in understanding of the area
of the problem and help in evaluating the methodologies along with their structures, steps, nature
and many more. This report is going to discuss about the two methodologies that are involved in
the process of developing a software and along with this a comparison of this two methodologies
is also done by the use of the NIMSAD framework (Athar Liaqat and Azam 2016). NIMSAD or
Normative Information Model-based System Analysis and Design refers to the framework that is
used for the purpose of discussing each of the strength and the weakness of the methodologies by
going through the problematic situations that is identifying the problem solver and what is the
process of solving the problem.

5INFORMATION SYSTEM
Discussion:
Extreme Programming:
Extreme Programming of XP refers to the methodology that is involved in the controlling
of the quality of the system by the process of taking the stages to an extreme level. The method
involves the breaking of the systems into small parts which makes the team have much more
control over the handling of the requirements of the clients (Rumpe and Schröder 2014). This
type of programming mainly focuses on the coding, development and the testing of the software
and each of this is done in such a way that the quality is maintained as well as the needs of the
clients.
Steps involved in Extreme Programming (XP):
The Lifecycle of the extreme programming mainly consists of the following:
1. Planning: This includes the meeting of the developer team with the clients for the purpose of
identifying the requirements of the clients and then making certain plans for the purpose of
implanting certain actions so as to meet the requirements of the clients. The combinations and
implementations of the plans helps the customers in getting the desired item.
2. Designing: This involves the use of the metaphors for the system or different names or
standards or class names and the methods. The process also involves the use of Software Class
Responsibility Card which allows the departure from the mind-set that is traditional and make a
technology that is totally object oriented (Sharp and Hall 2016).
3. Coding: The core part of the extreme programming is the coding. In this section the technical
team and the software developers will be working on the project so as to develop the product

6INFORMATION SYSTEM
according the requirements of the customers. The team members also make it sure that the
product they deliver valuable for the customers. The most suitable solution is figured out by the
process of coding. The thoughts about communicating about the problems of the programming is
also done by the coding (Teles 2017).
4. Testing: One of the important phase that I included in this phase is the testing. Testing is done
side by side during the development process. The testing is done according to the acceptance of
the customers and this testing is based on the demands of the customers when the development
process is completed. The demo version of the product is presented to the customer for the
purpose of testing the product. Testing involves two ways that is unit testing and acceptance
testing. Unit testing is the process which is done for the purpose of checking whether the desired
feature works according to the desired one. A multiple number of automated tests are written by
the programmers for the purpose of breaking the codes and if all the tests runs successfully then
the coding process is complete (Wood Michaelides and Thomson 2013). And acceptance test
refers to the verification of the fact that the requirements are understood by the programmers
working on the project and original requirements of the customers are satisfied.
5. Listening: The product that has been developed requires a lot of feedback from the customers.
The feedback from every customer plays an important role in any type of changes that are going
to be made or during the development process. In case if a new need arises from the customer
end then the developer makes it sure that the need of the customer is taken into consideration and
certain changes are done so as to satisfy the customer (Tabassum et al. 2017). The processes that
are discussed above is repeated when changes are made after receiving the feedback from the
customer. Feedback can be of different types besides the feedback from the customer and this
includes the feedback from the team as well as feedback from the system. Feedback from the

7INFORMATION SYSTEM
team refers to the fact that when any customer comes up with a new requirement during the
development then the team comes up with an estimated time for the implementation of the new
changes. Feedback from the system refers to the fact that during the writing of the unit test or
during the running of any type of periodic integration tests the programmer is able to get direct
feedback from the current state of the system when the changes have been implemented.
Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM):
SSADM or Structured System Analysis and Design Method refers to the systematic
approach toward the conducting of analysis and designing of the information system that is based
on the waterfall model. The main objective of SSADM is to improve the project management.
SSADM also aims at utilisation of the team expertise and the staffs involved in the development
in an effective manner and along with this it also aims at developing a system of better quality.
The best practices and the industry standards are followed by the SSADM and this mainly
includes the price for the project management, establishment of a good communication system
between the participants which is one of the key factors responsible for the success of the
projects (Abdelrahman 2015). It also helps in enabling of the projects so as to be supported by
the tools that are computer based. The SSADM model is used in conjunction with some other
method like the PRINCE that are more concerned with project management that has a broader
aspect.
Stages involved in SSADM:
Cascade or waterfall view of the system development is provided by the SSADM which
involves a number of steps or stages and this stages are listed below:
Stage 1: Study of feasibility:

8INFORMATION SYSTEM
This stage includes the analysis of the business requirement by the system analyst. All
this business requirements are mentioned by the clients and are prepared by the study of the
feasibility before proceeding with the project and entails whether the scheme that has been
proposed is viable for the client and is it suitable for the purpose of solving the problem of the
customer (ALLY and Zhang 2015). This study deals with the technical, financial, organisational
and the ethical aspects of the project.
Stage 2: Investigation of the current environment:
This stage includes the use of data flow diagram (DFD) by the system analyst to
investigate the current situation of the system. This is the process which identifies, modelling and
the documentation for tracking of the movement of the data around the information system
(Hussmann 2013)
Stage 3: options for business system:
After the evaluation of the current system it is the responsibility of the software analyst to
develop a list of the system options for the purpose of meeting the of the customer along with the
assessment of the risks and the finance (El-Seoud 2016).
Stage 4: Definition of the requirements:
After selection of the appropriate option from the business system what the system
analyst do is prepare a documentation so as to describe the new system and the specifications of
the new option in details. This stage includes the delivering of the information like definition of
the system processes and the functions, job satisfaction of the user and the system objectives by

9INFORMATION SYSTEM
the analyst of the system (Hussmann 2013). The analyst also considers the hardware, software
and the requirements of the network for the system.
Stage 5: Technical system options:
For the implementation of the new system a number of options are generated and are
aimed at generating a physical implementation of the new system. All this options are narrowed
down to a number of options which may vary from two to three in normal cases so as to present
the options to the user and to make the final decision regarding the choosing of the one
appropriate option (Esiefarienrhe Bukohwo, Adeiza and Ejura 2015).
Stage 6: Logical designs:
This stage includes the definition of the logical dialogue required for the new system like
the logical definition of all the user defined tasks. The menu structure and the user dialogues are
designed by the analyst. The update and the inquiry processes are also defined by the analyst.
Stage 7: Physical design:
The application of the technical and the logical specifications are done on the hardware’s
and the software’s. along with the descriptions of the functions, the specification of the functions
implemented are done in this process. Optimisation of the physical data structure is also done in
this process so as to meet the performance and the size requirements as specified by the user.
This is also the final stage of the process and this includes the conversion of the logical
specifications of the system in to real hardware and software. The conversion of the logical
structures into physical structures is done in terms of the database structure. The exact structure
is provided in this stage which states the functions and the way they are implemented (Lakhe

10INFORMATION SYSTEM
2016). The product received after this process is a complete physical design and this tells the
software engineers about how to build the system by providing specific details of the required
items.
NIMSAD:
NIMSAD framework is used for the purpose of comparing the two methodologies
namely the Extreme programming or XP and SSADM or Structured Systems Analysis and
Design Method. NIMSAD is nothing but a methodology that is used for the purpose of
evaluating and comparing two methodologies (Rahman et al. 2017). Methodology mainly refers
to the explicit way of structuring, thinking and taking actions that are both critical and creative.
Comparison between SSADM and Extreme Programming:
This section of the report is going to discuss about the comparison between the SSADM
and XP methodology by using the NIMSAD framework.
Problem Situation:
Extreme programming and SSADM both starts with the planning phase. In this planning
phase of both the methodologies the team members meet the user and by the term user it refers to
all those considerations of all the stakeholders who are getting affected by the current situation
problem. In some cases, the involvement of organisations, government and society
representatives are also included in the contribution during this stage (Hussmann 2013). The
early involvement is considered to be the key success factor for the identification of the problem
situations.
In the methodology of the SSADM the technical analyst meets the clients with an
intension of investigating the problems and gather the requirements of the system which is to be

11INFORMATION SYSTEM
handled by the desired system. A data flow diagram is used for the purpose of describing the
situation. Usually new tools are used by the analyst for the purpose of identifying the new
requirements of the system (Lakhe 2016). The staring of the process involves a brainstorming
session, questionnaires and standard templets in the analysis of the problem situation. The
planning phase is one of the important phase in the SSADM methodology which requires more
time and effort than any other phases.
Both of the methodologies starts with the planning phase but the planning process of XP
requires a lot of planning at high level than SSADM or the planning is just enough for the
starting of the requirement gathering process (Ghani and Yasin 2013). In the XP each process of
making the iterations involves the clients or the user. The approach of the user in case of extreme
programming is much more flexible in terms of the user requirements while the development of
life cycle so as to increase the visibility of the stakeholders toward the problem situation and the
future outcomes.
Intended problem solver:
The methodologies that we have discussed above includes the technician, analyst and the
project managers who are responsible for the solving of the problems. The technical nature of the
desired system is responsible for including all of them and this is done after the completion of
the requirement gathering stage. It is only possible for the developer to understand the possible
outcome of the system analysis and the descriptions of the problems from the previous stages.
The end users might not have the capability of understanding the problem situation and the
ultimate result is that they need assistance from the technicians for an efficient contribution
(Alampalli 2015). The use of extreme programming is more advantageous as a much more
visibility is provided to the customers during the process of planning and the development stage.

12INFORMATION SYSTEM
Problem solving processes:
This process involves 3 phases which are further divided into stages.
Phase 1: Formulation of the problem
Stage 1: Understanding of the Situation of the Concern
SSADM includes the setting of boundaries by the project team which is based on the
understanding of the problem situation. The DFD or data flow diagram is one of the best tool that
helps in the descripting of the situations and the construction of the boundaries but it also has a
drawback as the hidden boundaries are difficult to identify.
In case of XP the project team is involved in this stage but not like the SSADM which
includes the dealing with the problem of hidden boundaries. For the purpose of making changes
in the problem situation the team has a number of opportunities and along this this the team can
expand or reduce the boundaries in case of any changes.
Stage 2: Performing of the diagnosis:
The DFD provides the image of how the problems are solved in each data flow state in
case of SSADM. It shows the way how the data is processed along with this it will show the
logical diagram and the logical data flow model. But in XP it has the enough requirements for
the purpose of starting the problem diagnosis but this not totally efficient in the early stage
(Mocialov et al. 2015).
Stage 3: Definition of the progress outline:
This phase is not so important as the new system which is desired is totally based on the
requirements of the customers. In this case the XP has advantage as the clients are able to change

13INFORMATION SYSTEM
the requirements during the process of evaluation by understanding the functions of the new
system.
Stage 4: Definition of the Problem:
The definition of the problem in case of SSADM is provided in the early feasibility study
whereas in case of XP the problems can be redefined or defined as it is totally dependent on the
requirements of the clients (Viljoen 2016).
Stage 5: Derivation of the national system:
The gathering of the requirement in case of SSADM is a lengthy process so this has more
advantage in this stage. But in case of XP the requirement is gathered at the initial stage only for
starting the work.
Phase 2: Solutions for the design:
Stage 6: Logical design:
The SSADM methodology is more advantageous in this stage than the XP as the
methodology descripts the process by the use of the DFD. The logical design is documented in
SSADM which provides the diagram of the future outcome. But in XP the logical design is done
only for the purpose of starting the design (Issa and Isaias 2015).
Phase 3: Design implementation:
Stage 7: Implementation of the designs:
The process of SSADM includes the training of the user and involving them on the late
stage of the test solution and this covers the system integration with the existing system and the
current business processes and in case of XP this stage will provide the different nature to the
stage.

14INFORMATION SYSTEM
Conclusion:
From the above discussion we can conclude that both the methodologies have advantage
and as well as disadvantages on every stage of the process but one thing that is essentially
required for both the methodologies is highly skilled peoples. The developers and the team
should be well skilled enough to deliver the right project. These two methodologies cannot be
used in wider areas of problem solving. The involvement of the people is limited to technical in
both the processes whereas some external consultants are hired for the other purposes like
information gathering and many more. The requirements of the client are identified and are
defined in the early stages for the purpose of evaluating the system outcomes. Clients are able to
see the results after the completion of each stage and are able to provide feedback accordingly.
The XP methodology proves itself to be the more responsive methodology in responding to the
needed changes by the process of controlling and re-evaluation of the requirements as stated by
the customers.

15INFORMATION SYSTEM
References:
Abdelrahman, O.H., 2015. Analysis of the university of Khartoum library system using the
structured systems analysis and design methodology (SSADM). Cybrarians Journal, (38), pp.1-
33.
Alampalli, S., 2015. Complex information technology systems and Public Private Partnerships:
Factors influencing development. State University of New York at Albany.
ALLY, A.F. and Zhang, N.I.N.G., 2015. What the Current System Development Trends tell us
about Systems Development Methodologies: Toward explaining SSDAM, Agile and IDEF0
Methodologies. Journal of Applied Computer Science & Mathematics, (19).
Athar, A., Liaqat, R.M. and Azam, F., 2016. A Comparative Analysis of Software Architecture
Evaluation Methods. JSW, 11(9), pp.934-942.
Choudhari, J. and Suman, U., 2014. Extended iterative maintenance life cycle using eXtreme
programming. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 39(1), pp.1-12.
El-Seoud, S.A., 2016. A Comparison of Various Software Development Methodologies:
Feasibility and Methods of Integration. iJES, 4(4), pp.50-54.
Esiefarienrhe Bukohwo, M., Adeiza, M.R. and Ejura, A.G., 2015. Development of Commuter
Booking Software for Road Transport Company. Development, 120(19).
Ghani, I. and Yasin, I., 2013. Software Security Engineering in Extreme Programming
Methodology: A Systematic Literature Review. Science International, 25(2).

16INFORMATION SYSTEM
Hussmann, H., 2013. Pragmatic Software Engineering Methods. Innovationen bei Rechen-und
Kommunikationssystemen: Eine Herausforderung für die Informatik, p.27.
Hussmann, H., 2013. Pragmatic Software Engineering Methods. Innovationen bei Rechen-und
Kommunikationssystemen: Eine Herausforderung für die Informatik, p.27.
Issa, T. and Isaias, P., 2015. Models and Methodologies. In Sustainable Design (pp. 87-143).
Springer London.
Lakhe, B., 2016. Using SSADM for Relational Design. In Practical Hadoop Migration (pp. 53-
88). Apress.
Mocialov, B., Pollakowski, S., Akshabayev, Y., Madikenova, A. and Baird, M.M., 2014. JSD &
RUP.
Rahman, N.A.A., Hassan, R., Zakaria, Z. and Kasim, S., 2017. NIMSAD Framework to Evaluate
the Role-based Goal Modelling. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and
Information Technology, 7(5), pp.1728-1734.
Rock-Evans, R., 2014. Data Modelling and Process Modelling using the most popular Methods:
Covering SSADM, Yourdon, Inforem, Bachman, Information Engineering
and'Activity/Object'Diagramming Techniques. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Rumpe, B. and Schröder, A., 2014. Quantitative survey on extreme programming projects. arXiv
preprint arXiv:1409.6599.
Sharp, H. and Hall, T., 2016. Agile Processes, in Software Engineering, and Extreme
Programming: 17th International Conference, XP 2016, Edinburgh, UK, May 24-27, 2016,
Proceedings. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated.

17INFORMATION SYSTEM
Tabassum, A., Bhatti, S.N., Asghar, A.R., Manzoor, I. and Alam, I., 2017. Optimized Quality
Model for Agile Development: Extreme Programming (XP) as a Case
Scenario. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ADVANCED COMPUTER SCIENCE AND
APPLICATIONS, 8(4), pp.392-400.
Teles, V.M., 2017. Extreme Programming: Aprenda como encantar seus usuários
desenvolvendo software com agilidade e alta qualidade. Novatec Editora.
Viljoen, J., 2016. The selection and use of system development methodologies (Doctoral
dissertation, North-West University (South Africa), Potchefstroom Campus).
Wood, S., Michaelides, G. and Thomson, C., 2013. Successful extreme programming: Fidelity to
the methodology or good teamworking?. Information and Software Technology, 55(4), pp.660-
672.