Business requires Essay Example

process model that allows developers and clients to better comprehend and deal with risks at each phase of evolution. This model diminishes risks by using the prototyping model, which enables developers to incorporate the prototyping approach at any stage in product evolution.

The system can be viewed and approved by the customer based on their specifications through a unique approach that utilizes the concept of the waterfall model in a modified stepwise approach. Each individual step is processed before proceeding to the next, resulting in a more realistic iterative framework that reflects real-world situations.

If there is low risk in specification and no need for prototyping, the waterfall model can be used without the second quadrant of the spiral model. However, in a subsequent iteration, both models can be employed again. A review of the spiral model will determine its suitability for system design.

In the constantly changing and competitive business environment, the requirements are always expanding and evolving. The spiral model is suitable for such volatile situations as it allows for changes to be incorporated into the proposed system. This model accounts for changes in customers' environments and adapts accordingly. Other SDLC methods, on the other hand, usually consider business requirements as static. For example, the waterfall model is non-reversible, and once a design stage is completed, it cannot be revisited. The drawback of the spiral model is that it can be expensive as the deployment is revisited multiple times during the spiral cycle based on customer communication and feedback.

Expertise in risk assessment is required for implementing the spiral model. The time for building the system is considerable because each new requirement is planned and

implemented in every cycle. The consumption of resources is substantially high since all stages of development are followed for each cycle of the system's version. Compared to other models, the spiral model offers more opportunities. The fast-changing business external environment necessitates analyzing the market, taking risks, and embracing new challenges to succeed. Therefore, a flexible system development strategy is necessary for designing and building a system that can adapt to changing business requirements.

Compared to other available methods, the spiral model is distinctive. However, the RAD and Incremental methods in SDLC present a challenge to the spiral method. While Incremental approach is intricate, it has high flexibility in resolving inconsistencies. The popular RAD methodology in SDLC does not account for frequent changes, which is a disadvantage.

The proponents of the spiral model emphasize the importance of employing risk assessment and management strategies, a feature that sets this methodology apart from others used in Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). Unlike document or code driven methodologies, the spiral model follows a risk-driven approach, with repeated use of prototypes to minimize potential risks every cycle. This method prioritizes risk assessment during software productivity tool development in response to changing business environments. Ultimately, choosing a design methodology requires understanding the business requirements and selecting the appropriate methods for their implementation.

When it comes to large projects that have easily documented and immutable requirements, the waterfall model and other development approaches are typically employed (Sommerville, 2005). However, when external or internal factors are shifting frequently, businesses usually turn to the spiral model, which incorporates risk analysis and design techniques to correctly analyze requirements and frame needs. Additionally, other SDLC methods are

suitable for projects that have shorter development timelines and cannot afford delays. One such method is information engineering and RAD, which concentrates on an organization's information necessities and versatile processes that can adapt to future changes.

The waterfall model is different from the former because it focused heavily on product development and neglected the organization's requirements, making it less adaptable. On the other hand, the former places a strong emphasis on the organization's data. Rapid application development (RAD) techniques aim to streamline the complexity of waterfall methods by utilizing prototyping and other innovative methods. Unlike waterfall and information engineering techniques, RAD facilitates joint application development sessions to fully comprehend user requirements and make decisions on design functionality and usability. RAD addresses the shortcomings of not including users in the process by ensuring that all stakeholders can meet to discuss all aspects, including look, feel, and design. Additionally, RAD includes approaches that cater to the organization's current processes.

RAD's approach is distinctive in addressing an organization's immediate and emergency needs by dividing the system into sections for implementation. Unlike other methods that develop the information system as a whole, RAD identifies and prioritizes crucial components for urgent development, followed by phased implementation of the remaining components to complete the entire system.