Methodology
- Overview|
- Methodology|
- Project Management|
- Quality Assurance|
- Process Tools
Our reputation for consistently delivering quality services on time and within budget is attributed to repeatable process methodologies. We have researched, evaluated and adopted iterative development and incremental delivery (I&I) methodologies including agile, scrum, and rapid application development (RAD).
As a services organization, we apply these methodologies within the constraints of the engagement model agreed upon with the client. Specifically, there are two scenarios - I&I Standard and I&I with Iteration Zero.
Jose Ramon Mosteiro
Ford Oxaal
Dayon Kane
John Ferrari
Umesh Verma
Dan Boehm
Bo Keyslay
Michael VaughnThe engagement approach we adopt is driven by two sets of drivers, engagement model and requirements definition status drivers.
Engagement Model Drivers
Following engagement model drivers may be applicable:
- Client intends to build a long-term team at a development centre managed by Silicus. Their objective is not only to complete initial projects but also to leverage resources past initial projects. By leveraging dedicated resources on an ongoing basis, the Client expects increased productivity on an ongoing basis because of the knowledge vested in the resources.
- Clients not desirable of assuming any risk of delivery, require Silicus to take ownership, and request a fixed bid project engagement model.
- Client only has high-level requirements and may or may not agree to participate in an initial exercise (Iteration Zero) to develop detailed requirements.
Requirement Definition Drivers
Project requirements definition presented to us at the start may be categorized as:
- Well-Defined Requirements with low likelihood of major changes to the requirements
- High-Level Requirements requiring Iteration Zero to define detail requirements.
- Requirements deemed difficult to define and hold down (common with innovative development) either at the start or on completion of Iteration Zero
Based on these drivers we recommend an appropriate I&I methodology in conjunction with the appropriate engagement parameters.
Iterative-Incremental ( Agile or Scrum )
We suggest and recommend Agile or Scrum methodology in the following scenarios:
- Client intends to leverage a development centre (sunk cost), has full control over prioritization of requirements, regardless of status of requirements definition.
- The requirements at the start are well-defined and client requests and we agree to a fixed-bid
- The requirements at the start are high-level, the client requests a fixed-bid, and is not agreeable to our recommendation for Iteration Zero. To contain risks on both sides, we recommend a T&M with not-to-exceed engagement model. We also advise significant participation and close prioritization of requirements from the Client.
- The requirements are known at the start to remain largely fluid through the engagement. In this scenario, to contain risks on both sides, we recommend a T&M with not-to-exceed engagement model. We also advise significant participation and close prioritization of requirements from the Client.
Iterative-Incremental preceded by Iteration Zero (Based on Scenario)
- The requirements at the start are high-level, the client requests a fixed-bid, and agrees to our suggestion for an Iteration Zero to define detail requirements. Well-defined requirements are developed in Iteration Zero. We agree to Client's request for a fixed-bid to complete the rest of the engagement. We recommend leveraging Agile or Scrum methodologies.
- The requirements at the start are high-level, the client requests a fixed-bid, and agrees to our recommendation for an Iteration Zero to define detail requirements. Requirements developed in Iteration Zero are deemed to be difficult to define and hold-down. In this scenario, to contain risks on both sides, we recommend a T&M with not-to-exceed engagement model for the remainder of the engagement. We also advise significant participation and close prioritization of requirements from the Client. We recommend leveraging a Scrum or RAD methodologies.
We leverage standard iterative development and incremental delivery methodologies include Agile, SCRUM and RAD. We have well-defined process frameworks for each software development lifecycle model. Our frameworks provide a structured method for process control using checklists of activities with specific Entry criteria, Tasks, Validation procedures, and eXit criteria (ETVX) for each phase of the model.
We select the right methodology taking into consideration several factors including software lifecycle stage (new development, enhancement, maintenance, or modernization), unknowns in requirements (feature definition, workflow definition, design and architecture requirements, industry and technology requirements, etc.) and end-user feedback requirements amongst others.
Agile SCRUM
- Release Cycles
- Delivering functionality in small increments known as Sprints
Description
Scrum is one of the agile approaches to building software. It is a simple approach to the management of complex problems during Software development. We execute projects based on SCRUM methodology to support innovation and allow development teams to deliver high quality software in short time-frames.
- Criteria
- Project needs to constantly respond to feedback and changes to functional requirements
- Responsiveness from every team member through daily SCRUM meetings
- High team flexibility / creativity
- Used for high complexity projects
- Effective and collaborative communication and quick feedback important for success
- Usage
- Development Center engagements where functionality is important as opposed to time and cost (sunk cost in the ODC team)
- Innovative product development
Agile MSF
- Release Cycles
- Small multiple increments
- Multiple iterations in each increment
Description
Consistently delivering high-quality technology solutions on time and on budget is challenging for any software engineering team. The Microsoft Solutions Framework (MSF) provides people and process guidance—the proven practices of Microsoft — to help teams and organizations become more successful in delivering business-driven technology solutions to their clients. We have adopted MSF in a deliberate and disciplined approach to technology projects, based on a defined set of principles, models, concepts, guidelines, and proven practices from Microsoft.
- Criteria
- Customer has good understanding of functional requirements
- Responsiveness to environment at the end of each Iteration
- Medium team flexibility / creativity
- Used for medium complexity projects
- Effective and collaborative communication key to success and quick Iteration feedback important for success
- Usage
- Development Center engagements where time and scope estimation is important as opposed to cost (sunk cost in the ODC team)
- Software maintenance with periodic roadmap deliverables
Rapid Application Development
- Release Cycles
- Multiple Increments, Multiple Iterations in each increment
Description
Rapid Application Development: Simple yet powerful methodology – front end objects are created upfront and tested before proceeding to the middle or back end layer
- Criteria
- Stakeholders are not sure what they want other than basic requirements
- Strong collaborative team with dynamic gathering of requirements
- Quality is negotiable in return for creativity
- High team flexibility / creativity
- Project management willing to accept informal project deliverables
- Usage
- Development Center engagements where functionality is important as opposed to time and cost (sunk cost in the ODC team)
- Innovative Development