Robert Martin · 1999
In my last column I took a satirical look at the waterfall process, trying to expose some of its faults. This month we are going to look at an alternative that tries to deal with those faults. But before we begin I’d like to say: Thank goodness that waterfall showed up in the early seventies! Back in those days, there was very little thought put into the structure of a software application prior to coding it. If waterfall did nothing else, it got us to accept the need to think before we code.
Cited by 19
Gregory Erroll Bew · 2013
One of the fundamental changes in our technologically advanced society is the breadth of technologies available and the diverse backgrounds, experiences, and skillsets of the many inventors and developers. Traditional forms of systems engineering limit flexibility and the ability to react to emerging requirements by selecting one alternative to serve as a system, then committing to improving that technology until it can be all things, to all people. Often, years later, budgets have failed and the useful life of the technology is almost over. This paper suggests an iterative and incremental development approach that takes widely varying technologies and systems into account, nests them together to create a series of systems that are progressively more advanced and refined for usability, and that takes advantage of what is available now, all while planning development for future technologies. In order to test this process, a case study was conducted. It serves as a practical example of the proposed iterative and incremental system lifecycle approach. It was found that this method could save lives, drastically shorten fielding time for new capabilities, and increase user refinement of current systems as well as future alternatives.
Cited by 0
Victor R, A Brief History · 2008
Although many view iterative and incremental development as a modern practice, its application dates as far back as the mid-1950s. Prominent software-engineering thought leaders from each succeeding decade supported IID practices, and many large projects used them successfully. As agile methods become more popular, some view iterative, evolutionary, and incremental software development—a cornerstone of these methods—as the “modern ” replacement of the waterfall model, but its practiced and published roots go back decades. Of course, many software-engineering students are aware of this, yet surprisingly, some commercial and government organizations still are not. This description of projects and individual contributions provides compelling evidence of iterative
Cited by 0
D. Greer · IGI Global eBooks · 2011
The problems associated with requirements prioritisation for an incremental and iterative software process are described. Existing approaches to prioritisation are then reviewed, including the Analytic Hierarchy Process, which involves making comparisons between requirements and SERUM, a method that uses absolute estimations of costs, benefits, and risks to inform the prioritisation process. In addition to these, the use of heuristic approaches is identified as a useful way to find an optimal solution to the problem given the complex range of inputs involved. In particular genetic algorithms are considered promising. An implementation of this, the EVOLVE method, is described using a case study. EVOLVE aims to optimally assign requirements to releases, taking into account: (i) effort measures for each requirement and effort constraints for each increment; (ii) risk measures for each requirement and risk limits for each increment; (iii) precedence constraints between requirements (where one requirement must always be in an earlier or the same increment as another); (iv) coupling constraints between requirements (where two or more must be in the same increment); and (v) resource constraints (where two or more requirements may not be in the same increment due to using some limited resource). The method also handles uncertainty in the effort inputs, which are supplied as distributions and simulated using Monte Carlo simulation before carrying out the genetic algorithm operations. In addition to handling uncertainty, EVOLVE offers several advantages over existing methods since it handles a large range of factors. The overall implementation of the method allows the inputs to be changed at each iteration, and so better fits reality where requirements are changing all the time.
Cited by 6Open access
Steffen Salbinger · 2013
Cited by 0
Marc Zeller, Sebastian Klabes · Proceedings of the 29th European Safety and Reliability Conference (ESREL) · 2019
Cited by 0
Craig Larman, Victor R. Basili · 2003
Although many view iterative and incremental development as a modern practice, its application dates as far back as the mid-1950s. Prominent software-engineering thought leaders from each succeeding decade supported IID practices, and many large projects used them successfully. As agile methods become more popular, some view iterative, evolutionary, and incremental software development—a cornerstone of these methods—as the “modern ” replacement of the waterfall model, but its practiced and published roots go back decades. Of course, many software-engineering students are aware of this, yet surprisingly, some commercial and government organizations still are not. This description of projects and individual contributions provides compelling evidence of iterative
Cited by 0
2008
Iterative and incremental development seems to be a viable approach providing several benefits in interorganizational distributed software development. This paper presents initial results from an interview study on the usage of iterative and incremental development in interorganizational distributed software development projects. We describe identified practices, such as delivery synchronization, design and code reviews, communication emphasis, feature-based development, behavioral patterns, and frequent deliveries. We also present the benefits that the use of these practices brought, such as transparency of progress, increased developer motivation due to rapid feedback, flexibility regarding changes, the possibility to involve subcontractors early, ensuring joint understanding of requirements, and the avoidance of “big bang ” integration. It seems that the advantages of using the practices overweigh the extra communication and coordination cost they incur. 1.
Cited by 0
Fernando Pinciroli, Alex A. Torres Bermúdez · El Servicio de Difusión de la Creación Intelectual (National University of La Plata) · 2025
The iterative-incremental lifecycle is often misapplied in software development, with teams frequently adopting a merely incremental approach that fails to revisit previously developed components in order to follow an iterative development. This paper introduces the concept of "dual prioritization” as a key enabler for truly iterative and incremental process. The first level of prioritization organizes high-level requirements (e.g., use cases or epics) based on value, while the second prioritization is applied to their constituent features. We argue that without this two-tiered prioritization, it is impossible to construct effective backlogs for delivering Minimum Viable Products (MVPs) or Minimum Marketable Products (MMPs). Through a concrete example and visual representation, we demonstrate how dual prioritization improves delivery value and supports better decision-making under constraints such as time or budget. The paper concludes by outlining avenues for applying dual prioritization with alternative elicitation and prioritization techniques.
Cited by 0Open access
Shuang Guo, Haiying Li, Ding Chun-fang et al. · Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2011
Our new idea can make the system classification technology requirements with value-oriented requirements more easily and less ambiguous. So, the new concept is platform to refine the value orientation for the requirements of iterative and incremental development real-time database system. This idea gives us life time keep a single platform of real-time database update user needs and full availability, guarantees the reliability of the real-time database system. The method of the value orientation is the evolution of proof that the batter support requirements and specifications. This new model more system structure of the definition and model is better than the existing iterative and incremental model. All kinds of relations attribute and traceability value the requirement to alleviate.
Cited by 0
Ana Clara Loureiro Cruz, Carolina Niklaus Moreira da Rocha Rodrigues, Gabriel de Aragão Aleksandravicius et al. · EPJ Web of Conferences · 2024
The ATLAS experiment is a particle physics experiment situated at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN. It involves almost 6000 members from approximately 300 institutes spread all over the globe and more than 100 papers published every year. This dynamic environment brings some challenges such as how to ensure publication deadlines, communication between the groups involved, and the continuity of workflows. The solution found for those challenges was automation, which was achieved through the Glance project, more specifically through the Glance Analysis systems, developed to support the analysis and publications life cycle in 2011. Now, after twelve years, in order to satisfy the experiments’ most recent needs, the systems need code refactoring and database remodelling. The goal is to have only one system to accommodate all the analysis and publications workflows, the so-called ATLAS Publication Tracking system, an evolution of the current Analysis systems. This project includes a database remodelling that reflects the hierarchical relation between analyses and publications; a code base that supports non-standard workflows; the expansion of the current API so all the authorized ATLAS members can access ATLAS publication data programmatically; a service-oriented architecture for integration with external software, such as GitLab; the creation of an automatic test environment, which assures the quality of the systems on each update. The ATLAS Publication Tracking system is a long-term project being developed with an iterative and incremental approach, which ensures that the most valuable tools are implemented with priority while allowing a smooth transition between the old systems and the new one.
Cited by 0Open access
Oddur Benediktsson, Darren Dalcher, Karl Reed et al. · 2003
Abstract. Incremental software development and delivery have been used in software projects in many ways for many years. Justifications for incremental approaches include risk amelioration, the management of evolving requirements, and end-user involvement. Incremental development, including iterative, incremental delivery, has become a norm in many sectors. However, there has been little work on modelling the effort in such development and hence a dearth of comparative analyses of cost models for incremental development/delivery. We attempt to rectify this by proposing a COCOMO-style effort model for incremental development/delivery and explore the relationship between effort and the number of increments, thereby providing new insights into the economic impact of incremental approaches to software projects.
Cited by 8
François Dubuc, Bernard Guichoux, Patrick Cormery et al. · 2004
Cited by 0
Jona Ndrecaj, Shkurte Berisha, Erita Çunaku · Advances in wireless technologies and telecommunication book series · 2023
There are several studies on the software development life cycle (SDLC) and various approaches that can be utilized in planning and designing a software project. The contemporary norm for the software development process across industries is to build products using iterative or incremental design. Iterative and incremental development (IID) is useful for different types of software. The authors have provided a literature review of the current definitions of iterative and incremental design, and also discuss the most common pitfalls for each approach. The authors also analysed which approach is better for different stages of the development of mobile applications. At the end of this research, it was concluded that the iterative approach is the best approach for front-end development, while the incremental approach is a better fit for back-end development. Finally, the authors provided an analysis of utilizing IID for applications in the banking sector.
Cited by 0
Isyaku Maigari Ibrahim, Ogwueleka Francisca Nonyelum and Isah Rambo Saidu · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
ABSTRACT Software development process presents various types of models with their corresponding phases required to be accordingly followed in delivery of quality products and projects. Despite the various expertise and skills of systems analysts, designers, and programmers, systems failure is inevitable when a suitable development process model is not followed. This paper focuses on the Iterative and Incremental Development (IID)model and justified its role in the analysis and design software systems. The paper adopted the qualitative research approach that justified and harnessed the relevance of IID in the context of systems analysis and design using the Vocational Career Information System (VCIS) as a case study. The paper viewed the IID as a change-driven software development process model. The results showed some system specification, functional specification of system and design specifications that can be used in implementing the VCIS using the IID model. Thus, the paper concluded that in systems analysis and design, it is imperative to consider a suitable development process that reflects the engineering mind-set, with heavy emphasis on good analysis and design for quality assurance. KEYWORDS Iterative, incremental development, vocational carrier, system development process
Cited by 0Open access
Raja Sooriamurthi · 2005
How does one teach programming to a student who does not necessarily intend to become a hardcore programmer? With this question in mind, over the past two years our introductory course on programming and software development for business majors has been completely revamped and restructured. This paper discusses our experience and the effectiveness of our innovations in attaining our pedagogical goals. This work has been supported by three curriculum development grants from Indiana University over the past two years.
Cited by 1
Danh Nguyen-Cong, De Tran-Cao · 2013
This paper presents the results of systematically reviewing the current research literature on effort estimation in agile, iterative and incremental software projects (AIISPs). The primary purpose is to show evidences about common trends, gaps and recommendations for future studies. The results were limited to peer-reviewed conference papers/journal articles, written in English and published before 2013. The synthesis was made through classifying the papers based on different properties. The analysis indicates the need for future research on: 1) estimating effort for the remaining AIISPs, 2) analyzing the impact of properties of historical/current project data, 3) using benchmark data, 4) using composite models and 5) further empirical validation of the estimation models.
Cited by 26
Yao, Liang · Aaltodoc (Aalto University) · 2013
Testing is a main cost drive during software development and maintenance. However, software is often designed and implemented without the consideration of good testability. Consequently, in many cases poorly testable software is designed and implemented, at the cost of customer satisfaction and money. The goal of the thesis is to investigate how to assess and improve software testability in an iterative and incremental development process, if the software already has its legacy implementation and is to be maintained for a long term. In this thesis, the author investigates the research problem by applying design science research approach. He designs a testability assessment and improvement framework that covers the long term lifecycle of the software, by assessing testability iteratively with software evolution and by improving testability incrementally with implications and validation feedback from assessment results. The testability assessment and improvement framework is evaluated by a software project in Company A with legacy implementation. Due to time limitation, the author follows the framework with only himself as a practitioner in two-month duration. Results of the evaluation serve as detailed examples of how to apply the framework. According to the author's experience, the framework is basically practical to follow in a single software iteration process with some negative experience. Additionally, because of the weak evaluation, there are yet some potential limitations and threats to validity left to be investigated in the future.
Cited by 0
Iris Iddaly Méndez-Gurrola, Ramón Iván Barraza Castillo, Abdiel Ramírez Reyes et al. · Lecture notes in networks and systems · 2023
Cited by 1
Egholm, Cecilie, Aake Packness, Stokholm, Jakob et al. · Figshare · 2020
Abstract In composing multi-thematic questionnaires for the Lolland-Falster Health Study (LOFUS), we faced a range of challenges, for which we found limited guidance in the literature. LOFUS is a household-based population study covering multiple medical and social research areas and targeting the mixed rural-provincial population of 103,000 persons on the Danish islands Lolland and Falster. Households were randomly selected for invitation. In this paper, we describe and discuss challenges in developing the questionnaires related to stakeholders, content of the questionnaire, and the process itself. The development process was characterised by loops of learning and can be described as an iterative and incremental process. We propose recommendations to researchers and administrators involved in similar development processes, including awareness of the non-linearity and complexity of the process, a need for negotiations and navigation among multiple stakeholders, and acknowledgement of pragmatism as an inherent part of decisions made in the process.
Cited by 0Open access