 |
|
|
 |
||
|
DSDM is highly structured, ISO 9000 compatible, but to quote from the consortium’s own website; “DSDM is designed to be lightweight and agile, but full DSDM can be too heavy for small projects: those lasting a matter of weeks rather than months; with one or two Developer/Testers and one or two Ambassador Users; or those that use a standard technical infrastructure for the organization.” We find it a little worrying when an Agile Method is admitted but its’ main proponent to be “too heavy for small projects”. The method does allow for tailoring to suit particular projects and these is a Lightweight DSDM which combines the recognized products into a simpler set. But what about XP? It is now supposedly the most popular Agile Method or as Martin Folwer says “the one that has got the most attention.” However, I’ve seen many organizations recoil from XP, even Fowler says “If the discipline isn't there, or the team is too large...”(he goes on to recommend Crystal, , but says it’s even lighter than XP. The approach of Modular Prototyping has been to take our own historic experience, the well defined product structure of DSDM and the daily practices of XP and fuse them into an ISO 9000 compliant methodology which, while we won’t claim solves all the problems of the other methodologies, has served us well for many years. We have consistently delivered projects on time (or early) and on budget. We aren’t the only ones to try to use features of more than one lightweight method, after all that is the purpose of the Agile Alliance. Also the DSDM consortium has produced a tailored DSDM/XP version. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
 |
|||||||
|
|
|
[Agile Approach] |