Over the years I have designed and installed a number of development methodologies into various organisations (I'll not list them here). What I'm interested in is a description of the development methodology that is adopted by your company, why, and how well its working.
I'd also like to know your description of the development method, not just the company's blurb sheet. For example, I was once working for a company who was the major client of a software development company. I was asked to report on the development methodology that the software company had adopted and how well it was working in favour of the client.
The company, like a great many others I know, proudly advertised their methodology as "Agile". Agile is not itself a methodology but rather a concept. There are a number of methodologies which come within the concept of "Agile". Upon investigation, the company was operating under "Iterative and Incremental Development" (IID). After getting to know both the development company, and the client, I was able to report that the IID methodology worked exceedingly well for both the development company, and their major client in this case.
In most of the methodologies I have installed, I have yet to install a stock-standard, out of the book methodology. I much prefer to look at several areas within the company I am contract to, to ensure a good fit. These areas include:
- How the programming team currently works, what works well and what needs improvement.
- The major applications that the team completes, e.g. large developments that take longer than 6 months to deliver, or daily support and enhancements to legacy applications.
- The major clients of the team. This may be serving in-house applications (in which case the customer may be another business area) or small, large, or corporate external customers. each has its own unique needs.
- The slant that management wants to portray to the outside world.
- Both the history and the perceived future of the development team.
- The history and quality of the delivered products.
- The location and proximity of the team. For example, some companies I have worked with perform all their development in India with local staff consisting of Business Analysis and Technical Architects. Others have split their development team between two cities.
- The makeup of the team. Some teams may have 'prima donna' programmers that simply will not conform to changes unless they are subtle or suit their own needs.
All these will have an effect on the eventual development methodology that will be designed and installed.
One example of a change to the standard methodology was where I designed and installed a standard Waterfall methodology to cope with external programmers, but changed the process to be used for Functions, instead of whole applications. This reduced the time it took for the external programmers to return their first cut that could be tested and, where necessary, returned for minor alterations. This meant that for any application there were several waterfalls operating at any one time. A sort of RAD-ified, or even XP'd Waterfall.
So what's your advertised methodology? What's your actual methodology? How well does it work for the team? And how well does it work for the client/customer?
You don't need to tell me the company you work for, and in most cases it may not be prudent.