Search results

Software development life cycle (SDLC) has always been the core methodology for any software engineer that depicts the entire development process which an organization is bound to utilize to achieve successful software. The purpose of this paper is to bring forth a conceptual model after analysing the best practices in SDLC, and extracting the best out of agile methodologies and the open source software, thereby bringing forward an optimised structure.

The OASDLC is hypothesized specifically for “Brihaspati” project and is formulated keeping in mind the gaps and limitations posed by existing SDLC models. OASDLC is further put to test for achieving lower costs and efforts involved. The tests are further substantiated by means of hypothesis validation through execution of a survey based research.

It has been observed that the present conceptual model further optimizes the efforts involved while adopting such a practice.

This paper proposes a novel SDLC model so as to achieve a best practice for a software project. On analysing the issues involved such as tight budget and timelines, it led the authors to formulate a newer concept “Open Agile Software Development Life Cycle model” (OASDLC).

Inherent in MIS applications undergoing development are elements of risk and a potential for failure. A strategy for choosing a development approach based on project risk is presented. Project risk is examined in the light of project size, a development group's experience with a technology and project structure. Three development approaches are considered: SDLC, prototyping and end‐user development. The simple and joint outcomes of project risk vis‐à‐vis development approach are described along with the proposed strategy.

This paper aims to propose an extended version of systems development life cycle (SDLC) based on critical systems thinking for information system (IS) adoption in an organizational context from a management perspective.

The model integrates traditional SDLC with the ongoing process of “phase‐stakeholders‐identification” or “pha‐stak‐ification”. The emerging systemic stakeholder networks is proposed to be applied with network mechanisms to influence stakeholders' attitudes towards IS adoption. The authors, considering IS adoption as a multi‐phase innovation project, argue that boundary considerations using a multiple stakeholder perspective (boundary critique) provides an alternative focus for IS adoption.

The study suggests that the proposed model has the capacity to serve as a roadmap for a smooth IS adoption by facilitating organizational learning and change.

The study has not been tested empirically.

Successful IS implementation improves organizational efficiency and creates competitive advantage. Established information technology adoption models like technology acceptance model and theory of reasoned action consider technology adoption from the users' viewpoint without taking a holistic perspective into account. This article takes a systems perspective to technology development and the systems development life cycle.

The challenge of reducing the development time while increasing the quality of new information systems is becoming more urgent with the growing demands on data processing (DP) services. Structured methodologies for system development provide a means to improve stagnant DP professionals' productivity, overcome communication problems and reduce the risks of systems failure. These methodologies can only be implemented with active management participation and changes in the roles of users and DP professionals. In this article we examine the above issues and suggest methods of how management can facilitate the implementation of these methodologies.

The purpose of this paper is to propose the integration of disaster recovery plan (DRP) objects development activities with the activities of the structured system analysis and design method (SSADM) methodology for developing an information system.

A step‐by‐step correlation of the SSADM methodology with DRP development activities is performed. By following this approach, a smaller system for emergency operations (DRP) can be designed in parallel with that for normal operations. Furthermore, the implementation of a normal operations system based on the requirements analysis and of an emergency operations system based on the critical business functions may follow the same line of reasoning.

The proposed enhancement brings benefits to both the organization and the system developer in terms of expenditure, self‐knowledge, personnel experience, reaction time, time and capability management and increase of competitiveness.

The practical acceptance of the proposed approach can drastically reduce the time elapsing between the completion of the normal operations system and the design of the emergency operations system. Moreover, the needs of the emergency operations system can be forecasted during the design of the normal operations system.

The paper extends the SSADM methodology by incorporating DRP development.

The purpose of this paper is to present an integrative framework for handling the security and usability conflicts during the system development lifecycle. The framework has been formulated while considering key concerns raised after conducting a series of interviews with practitioners from the industry. The framework is aimed at assisting system designers and developers in making reasonably accurate choices when it comes to the trade-offs between security and usability. The outcomes of using the framework are documented as design patterns, which are disseminated among the community of system designers and developers for use in other but similar contexts.

A design science research approach was used to develop the integrative framework for usable security. Interviews were conducted for identification of the key concerns; however, the framework was validated during a workshop. Moreover, to validate the patterns’ template and the usable security pattern identified after instantiating the framework, a survey instrument was used.

It is important to consider the usability aspect in the development of security systems; otherwise, the systems, despite being secure against attacks, would be susceptible to user mistakes leading to compromises. It is worthwhile to handle usable security concerns right from the start of system development life cycle. Design patterns can help the developers in assessing the usability of their security options.

The framework would assist the designers and developers in handling the security and usability conflicts right from the start of the system development life cycle. The patterns documented after using the framework would help not only the designers and developers working in the industry but also freelancers.

The authors present a novel framework to handle the security and usability conflicts during the system development life cycle. The development process of the framework was driven by the concerns raised after a series of interviews with the practitioners from industry. The framework presented in this paper was validated during a workshop in which it was exposed for review and comments by the participants from the industry. To demonstrate the use of patterns in general and the framework in particular, a case study featuring smart grids from the domain of cyber-physical systems is presented, which (to the best of the authors’ knowledge) features the first work relevant to usable security in the domain of cyber-physical systems.

Referring the phenomenon, the researchers create an application to deal with problems faced by the technician team and the vendor in searching the location of BTS tower.

This application uses the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) methodology which is the process of developing or changing a software system. One of the models owned by SDLC is the waterfall technique. It provides a sequential software flow approach starting from analysis, design, coding, testing and supporting stages.

There are some of the technician team and the vendor find difficulties in looking for the position of the BTS tower. As a solution, a facility which enables them to access the location in searching the BTS tower is needed.

The following is a display of the design results and the implementation of writing code in applications that have been made previously.

Applying total quality management (TQM) to the software development process can control software quality and productivity. Selecting suitable tools for the TQM process can strengthen the capability of software quality assurance. This article provides a manager’s guide to implementing a total quality process during a systems development life cycle. Also, tools integration can make a complicated TQM‐based software development environment easier.

“Agile management” refers to a set of management goals, principles, values and practices that emerged to speed up software. Now its tools and culture are spreading to all kinds of organizations throughout the world—from R&D to top management teams. As some corporations race to become “agile” they can lose sight of the essential ideas and practices of Agile methodology

In September 2016, a group of large firms came together in New York to see whether they could agree on what Agile stood for in their own organizations. They aspired to create workplaces that draw on everyone’s creative talents and kindle everyone’s potential in workplaces that respect individuals and are highly productive and profitable. The firms involved were members of the SD Learning Consortium (SDLC)—a non-profit corporation.

As it is being adopted in a wide variety of corporate settings since 2001, the core concept of Agile has evolved.

To be fully entrepreneurial, the whole organization needs to embrace the Agile mindset and function as an interactive network, not a top-down bureaucracy with just a few teams implementing Agile tools and processes.

As Agile is being increasingly adopted by all corporate functions and levels of management it is essential to focus the whole organization on creating value for the customer.

This paper aims to provide a review of the two often-confusing learning theories: constructivism and constructionism. It then presents their similarities and differences by identifying various learning dimensions of the two philosophies. The authors then develop a teaching-learning framework that integrates those dimensions. The authors have also implemented the framework in two information technology (IT) courses and obtained students’ feedback that relate to various learning dimensions of both of the two philosophies.

The authors review existing literature to understand the difference between constructivism and constructionism and develop a list of learning dimensions that can be applied to classroom education. They then discuss the background information or tools necessary to develop a teaching-learning framework and apply that framework through a case study. They finally present the results.

A constructivist teacher sets up the learning environment for students that fosters individual learning and presents a problem to be solved, while the students go on their own way to produce a personally meaningful artifact without any further teacher’s intervention. On the other hand, the constructionist teacher sets up the environment for collaborative learning for students, then he or she defines the problem to be solved and the meaningful end product to be developed, and then guides them to reach towards the goal. Student assessment supports this difference.

Researchers and teachers should look carefully which methodology they are discussing and which one they are applying. They can further the authors’ research in a different angle than the authors did by finding the learning dimensions.

Teachers should use constructionist approach to set up their classroom and guide their students throughout the course time, such that students can work collaboratively on a project to learn the important concepts to be developed. They should also use appropriate tools and technologies that enhance classroom activities and learning. Teacher should act as a guide/facilitator or a project manager to plan for the classroom/project and monitoring and controlling project/class throughout the semester.

Understanding the critical differences between the two learning philosophies, educators in all levels should be clear how to set up their classrooms – from kindergarten to university education, such that all students can develop their knowledge not only through personal cognition but also through interaction with others. A collaborative environment produces knowledgeable people in the society with better understanding and respect toward each other.

Collaborative learning environment provides a better learning opportunity over personal cognition – a major enhancement in constructionism over constructivism. Sharing the creation process as well as the product, and the use of various tools and technologies in the development process, provide a better understanding of a subject matter. The discussions and results presented here might bring some insights to the instructors who might be contemplating to implement the educational philosophies of constructivism or constructionism, or intermixing of the two in their classrooms.