System Development Methods
CT00046-3-2
Comparing
Methodologies
Topic & Structure of the Lesson
Comparing Methodologies
Framework
Blending Methodologies
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 2
Slide 2
Learning Outcomes
At the end of the module, you should be able to:
1. Describe the criteria needed to compare
methodologies.
2. Explain how a framework is used to select a
methodology for a project.
3. Understand the purpose of blending
methodologies.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 3
Slide 3
Key Terms you must be able to use
If you have mastered this topic, you should be able to
use the following terms correctly in your assignment
and exam:
Comparing Methodologies
Framework
Blending Methodologies
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 4
Slide 4
Comparisons of Methodologies
Comparison made to select one (or more) suitable methodology
for a project.
Wrong selection (or no methodology) would be disastrous.
According to the report by Hass (2007), the following are the
troubling results from the past projects:
$80 -145 billion per year is spent on failed and cancelled projects (The
Standish Group International, Inc.)
25% - 40% of all spending on projects is wasted as a result of re-work
(Carnegie Mellon)
50% are rolled back out of production (Gartner)
40% of problems are found by end-users (Gartner)
Poorly defined applications have led to a persistent miscommunication
between business and IT. This contributes to a 66% project failure rate
for these applications, costing U.S. businesses at least $30 billion every
year (Forrester Research)
60% - 80% of project failures can be attributed directly to poor
requirements gathering, analysis, and management (Meta Group)
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 5
Slide 5
Comparisons of Methodologies
(continued)
Nearly two thirds of all IT projects fail or run into
trouble. (see figure below for the results of the
2006 CHAOS Survey)
Source: The blending of traditional and agile project management (Hass, 2007)
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 6
Slide 6
Choosing the right Methodology
depends on …..
The type of problems and suggested solution
Direct solution, hypothesis, anomalies, etc.
The type of project
Exclusive, corporate, partnership, outsourced, etc.
Speed of the project.
Type of products
Mobile, web, stand-alone, enterprise / corporate,
etc.
The expected output (conceptual, working product,
etc.)
Requirements are fixed or can be often changing.
Size and budget of the project
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 7
Slide 7
Choosing the right Methodology
depends on ….. (continued)
Knowledge of developer
Developer trained specifically under one
methodology. Have enough resources for most of the
process.
Developers can be easily trained on the
methodology.
The Vendor/partner is familiar with the methodology
you use.
Tools that developer have VS tools recommended by
the methodology
Support for a methodology is easily obtained
Tools, technologies, infrastructure, etc.
Experts are available.
Availability of users throughout the project.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 8
Slide 8
Comparing Methodologies
Example
Features Waterfall V-Model Spiral RAD
Identification of At the At the beginning At the beginning Flexible and
requirements beginning of a of a project of a project
specifications project adaptable to
changes
Cost Low Expensive Expensive Low
Expertise High Medium High Medium
Flexibility Rigid Little flexible Flexible High
Maintenance Least Least Typical Easily maintained
Duration Medium to Long Medium to Long Medium to Long Short term project
term project term project term project
Source: Mishra & Dubey (2013)
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 9
Slide 9
Framework
Frameworks are a systematic way of applying methodologies
It allows developers to see the system from different ‘point of
view’
It shows the most efficient solutions for problems.
Example: MULTIVIEW framework, NIMSAD framework.
MULTIVIEW: Looks at a scenario from many views and
creates an automated design based on the captured tasks.
Focuses on Organizational analysis, Information
analysis, Technical design, Human computer
interaction and Work design.
NIMSAD: A methodology for selecting and evaluating a
methodology using three criteria: the problem situation,
the problem solver and the problem-solving process.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 10
Slide 10
NIMSAD Framework
Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and
Design (NIMSAD) is a general framework that was derived from
problem-solving industry, consultancy practice and ‘action
research’, and can be used for evaluating any methodology.
The reasons for developing a framework for assisting
methodology users arose because of the availability of so many
methodologies, and the difficulties for problem solvers in
selection and use.
The aims of NIMSAD framework are:
Serve as a way of understanding the areas of problem
solving, in general.
Help evaluate methodologies, their structure, steps,
form, nature, etc.
Help to draw conclusions.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 11
Slide 11
NIMSAD Framework
Elements
The NIMSAD framework has four essential
elements, namely:
The ‘problem situation’ (the methodology
context)
The intended problem solver (the methodology
user)
The problem-solving process (the methodology)
The evaluation of the above three
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 12
Slide 12
NIMSAD Framework
The ‘problem situation’
Most problem situations are set within an organizational
context; thus, organizations are important for
methodologies because:
The effectiveness of information processing
systems can be measured only to the extent of their
contribution to information users in organizations.
In order to develop an information processing system,
we need to interact with organizational
members, to know what information they use
now, to discover what problems they are trying to
solve with this information, to understand how the
information processing system that we design are
going to operate, and to know how exactly they are
going to solve the identified problem, etc.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 13
Slide 13
NIMSAD Framework
The ‘intended problem solver’
Intended problem solvers, tend to select some
elements of the situation as being relevant and
useful for study and transformation. Some of this
selection are implicit and unconscious (based on gut
feelings, assumptions), and some are explicit concepts,
models and methodologies that are employed.
Some characteristics constitute the intended problem
solver’s ‘mental construct’ including:
Perceptual process acts as a filter to information from
the ‘action world’ and determine what information is to be
significant.
Values help to pass judgement on situations or to assess
the actions, behavior, output and performance of others.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 14
Slide 14
NIMSAD Framework
The ‘intended problem solver’
(continued)
Ethics is related to the standards which we and others place
on a person’s expected behaviour.
Motives are those needs that we try to satisfy in each
situation but keep private to ourselves
Prejudices can be defined as persistent opinions which we
form from our values, experiences, or out of insecurity. This
may be useful to the extent that they help to reduce the time
we spend on information gathering.
Experiences are an invaluable source for developing
knowledge and skills and help to form implicit models for
structuring our understanding of situations.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 15
Slide 15
NIMSAD Framework
The ‘intended problem solver’
(continued)
Reasoning ability is an ability to abstract the essential
aspects from any situation and to understand the concepts
underlying out thought processes i.e., examine what makes
us reason in a particular way.
Knowledge and skills are acquired from education,
training, experience.
Roles can be defined as the explicit behavioural
characteristics sets that can be attributed to someone
responsible for performing a set of tasks.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 16
Slide 16
NIMSAD Framework
The ‘problem-solving process’
In the problem-solving process, the problem formulation
phase can be expressed in several stages, namely:
Problem Formulation
Stage 1: understanding of the ‘situation of
concern’
Stage 2: performing the diagnosis
Stage 3: defining the prognosis outline
Stage 4: defining problems
Stage 5: deriving notional systems
Solution Design
Stage 6: performing conceptual/logical design
Stage 7: performing physical design
Design Implementation
Stage 8: implementing the designs
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 17
Slide 17
NIMSAD Framework
The ‘evaluation’
The evaluation helps to measure the
effectiveness of the problem-solving process
and the problem solver in the ‘problem
situation’.
Some aspects of evaluation to be carried out
include:
To assess whether the designed systems were
implemented within the limits or resources, time,
and efforts.
To assess whether the ‘action systems’ do what
they are supposed to do i.e., the features of the
notional systems have been realized.
To assess whether the ‘problems’ have been
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 18
Slide 18
Blending Methodologies
Sometimes one methodology is not sufficient for
a particular project.
The project might be blended as well
Vendors are involved / part of the project has
been outsourced
A blended methodology is a methodology that
has been created by “blending” together other
methodologies.
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 19
Slide 19
Blending Methodologies
(continued)
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 20
Slide 20
Blending Methodologies
Example
• A study by Rahmanian (2014) has proposed a blending
methodology which composed of the Waterfall
methodology and SCRUM.
• The Waterfall methodology provides a sequential
development process with a lack of capability to
accept frequent changes. Whilst, SCRUM provides various
types of communication ways i.e. Sprint planning meeting,
daily Scrum meeting, Sprint review, and Sprint Retrospective.
• The blended methodology is divided into two parts: one part
requires a high level of planning, and the other one requires a
high level of agility. During the initial stage. The project team
and client apply a "waterfall-up-front" to determine
detailed requirements. While the agile approach during
the design, implementation, and unit testing phases
helps to speed up the process, reduce risks of rework,
delays, and rescheduling. At last, the "waterfall-at- end"
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 21
Slide 21
Blending Methodologies
Example (continued)
A Blending Methodology for Software Development and Project Management
(Rahmanian, 2014)
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 22
Slide 22
Conclusions on System
Development Methodologies
All Methodologies include:
Stages – steps on what to do throughout a project
TOOLS – often CASE TOOLS includes any use of
computer-based support in the software development,
help to simplify the task.
Testing Tool to test other software.
Code Generator to generate programming codes
from design.
TECHNIQUES - different ways of doing tasks.
Prototyping – A model of the system developed to
get feedback
Fact-finding using techniques such as interviews,
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 23
Slide 23
Summary
Methodology comparison made to select one (or more)
suitable methodology for a project, as wrong selection (or no
methodology) would be disastrous.
Choosing the right methodology for a project should consider
the type of problems and suggested solution, the type of
project, type of products, users' requirements and availability,
size and budget of the project, knowledge of developers, and
support to a methodology.
The NIMSAD framework is used to evaluate a methodology
based on ‘problem situation’, problem solver, and problem-
solving process.
A blended methodology is a methodology that has been
created by “blending” together with other methodologies, for
example blending traditional and Agile methodologies.
All system development methodologies include various stages
(– steps on what to do throughout a project), tools (software
that helps to simplify the task), and techniques (different ways
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 24
Slide 24
Question & Answer
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 25
Slide 25
Next Session
• System Planning
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 26
Slide 26
References
Rahmanian, M. (2014). A comparative study on hybrid IT project
management. International Journal of Computer and
Information Technology, 3(05), 1096-1099.
Mishra, A., & Dubey, D. (2013). A comparative study of different
software development life cycle models in different
scenarios. International Journal of Advance research in
computer science and management studies, 1(5).
Hass, K. B. (2007). The blending of traditional and agile project
management. PM world today, 9(5), 1-8.
Jayaratna, N. (1994). Understanding and evaluating
methodologies: NIMSAD, a systematic framework. McGraw-Hill,
Inc.
Tilley, S. (2019). Systems Analysis and Design 12th Edition.
Cengage Learning. ISBN-13: 978-0357117811. ISBN-10:
0357117816
Pressman, R., & Maxim, B. (2019). Software Engineering: A
Practitioner's Approach 9th Edition. McGraw Hill. ISBN-13: 978-
1259872976. ISBN-10: 1259872971
Dennis, A., Wixom, B,. & Roth, R.M. (2021). Systems Analysis
Module Code & Module Title Slide Title SLIDE 27
Slide 27