We know that Agile Development Methodologies is a process that was developed as a reaction to the complexities as well as inefficiencies of the waterfall model. In an article, “What do we know about Agile software development” we can view agile methods that are extreme programming (XP) and Scrum as a reaction plan which essentially revolves around on traditional methods, which emphasize a “rationalized, engineering-based approach.” This encompasses incorporating extensive planning, coding processes and rigorous reuse.
However, there are practical implications to an Agile software implementation as well which means that studies suggest that there are serious boundaries, such as the Agiles’ in ability to sustain the on-site customer’s role for long periods and the difficulty of introducing agile methods into large and complex projects, the review results suggest that agile methods can improve job satisfaction, productivity and customer satisfaction.
At the same token another implication is that Agile requires active engagement with the client, which essentially means that the system does not work very well because it must have a guided feedback through the client. Therefore, the project needs constant feedback in order to have the direction it needs to head in order to be a viable solution for the client.
Waterfall on the other hand is something which has constantly been battered when tested in large complex implementations, but it has persevered. Simply put, the bureaucracies, the bureaucrats, the policies, procedure, the clearance needed to support a staged development process with repeated evaluation and sign-off plays in a complex environments as well as software. Waterfall has its flaws as well which does not allow the chance to