Assignment Content: You've Been Hired To Implement The CRM S

Assignment Contentyouve Been Hired To Implement The Crm System For We

You’ve been hired to implement the CRM system for WeLoveVideo, Inc. Prepare a 6- to 8–slide multimedia-rich presentation explaining the waterfall and Agile SDLCs. Include the typical phases of an entire systems project, differences in documentation, stakeholder expectations based on the SDLC, pros and cons of each SDLC, and a graphic comparing waterfall and Agile for the project. Also, include attributes of WeLoveVideo, Inc. that influence your SDLC recommendation. Write an executive summary recommending an SDLC approach with supporting APA-formatted references.

Paper For Above instruction

The successful implementation of a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system requires a clear understanding of the software development life cycle (SDLC) models. Two predominant SDLC methodologies are the Waterfall model and Agile, each with distinct characteristics, advantages, and suitability depending on project dynamics. This paper explores these models comprehensively, compares their features, and offers recommendations tailored to the unique attributes of WeLoveVideo, Inc., illuminated by relevant academic and industry sources.

Understanding Waterfall and Agile SDLCs

The Waterfall SDLC is a linear, sequential approach that systematically progresses through defined phases, including requirements analysis, system design, development, testing, deployment, and maintenance. Each phase must be completed before the next begins, with minimal iteration or revisiting of previous phases. This predictability renders it suitable for projects with well-defined requirements, such as those in regulated industries requiring extensive documentation (Royce, 1970).

Conversely, the Agile SDLC is iterative and incremental, emphasizing flexibility, collaboration, and customer involvement. Agile projects comprise multiple short cycles, called sprints, which deliver functional components incrementally. This approach fosters responsiveness to changing requirements and continuous stakeholder feedback (Beck et al., 2001). Agile’s adaptability suits projects where requirements evolve or are initially unclear—common scenarios in CRM implementations where user needs often develop as the project progresses.

Phases of a Systems Project

Both SDLC models encompass critical phases. In Waterfall, these progress linearly: requirements, design, implementation, testing, deployment, and maintenance. Documentation—such as requirement specifications, design documents, test cases, and user manuals—are produced at each stage, providing comprehensive traceability (Royce, 1970). This extensive documentation aligns with the need for regulatory compliance and contractual clarity but can slow down adaptability.

In Agile, phases overlap or recur iteratively. Deliverables such as user stories, sprint backlogs, and release plans are dynamically created and refined. Documentation is lightweight, focusing on value-added artifacts that support ongoing development rather than exhaustive records (Beck et al., 2001). This reduces overhead and accelerates responsiveness to change.

Stakeholder Expectations and SDLC Choice

In a Waterfall approach, stakeholders anticipate a structured process with predictable timelines and comprehensive documentation. They expect that once requirements are set, changes are minimized, and the final product aligns closely with initial specifications (Royce, 1970). In contrast, Agile stakeholders expect regular updates, iterative delivery, and the flexibility to modify requirements based on evolving insights. They are comfortable with less documentation but expect continuous communication and engagement (Beck et al., 2001).

Pros and Cons of Each SDLC

Waterfall SDLC

• Pros: Clear structure, well-defined milestones, extensive documentation, predictable schedule, suitable for fixed-scope projects.
• Cons: Inflexibility to change, late testing, risk of misaligned final product if initial requirements are misunderstood, potential delays if issues are identified late.

Agile SDLC

• Pros: Flexibility to adapt to changing requirements, early and frequent delivery of functionalities, enhanced stakeholder engagement, improved risk management.
• Cons: Less predictability in scope, potential for scope creep, requires high stakeholder involvement, less documentation which might complicate compliance and maintenance.

Comparison Chart: Waterfall vs. Agile for WeLoveVideo, Inc.

Attributes of WeLoveVideo, Inc. Influencing SDLC Recommendation

Several attributes of WeLoveVideo, Inc. factor into the decision-making process. If the company’s CRM requirements are well-understood, stable, and compliance-driven, the Waterfall model may be appropriate, offering predictability and comprehensive documentation. Conversely, if the company operates dynamically with evolving customer engagement strategies or desires rapid deployment and iterative feedback, Agile would be advantageous (Rau, 2010). The size and expertise of internal teams, the need for ongoing stakeholder involvement, and past project experiences also influence the optimal SDLC selection.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Considering the nature of CRM implementations, where user needs and industry trends often evolve during development, an Agile approach appears best suited for WeLoveVideo, Inc. This model supports flexibility, quicker deployment of functional modules, and ongoing stakeholder engagement, essential for capturing customer preferences and refining features in a competitive video industry. Extensive academic research advocates for Agile's effectiveness in projects requiring adaptability, such as CRM systems (Highsmith & Cockburn, 2001; Conforto et al., 2016).

Nevertheless, elements of the Waterfall approach, especially in areas demanding strict compliance and comprehensive documentation, can be incorporated within an Agile framework, resulting in a hybrid model that leverages the strengths of both methodologies. Such a tailored approach ensures regulatory adherence while maintaining agility in development cycles.

References

• Beck, K., Beedle, M., Van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Coulouris, P., et al. (2001). Manifesto for Agile Software Development. Agile Alliance. https://agilemanifesto.org/
• Conforto, E. C., Salum, F., Amaral, D. C., da Silva, S. L., & de Almeida, L. F. M. (2016). Can Agile Project Management Evolve Toward Supporting Complex Projects? Journal of Systems and Software, 121, 176-192.
• Highsmith, J., & Cockburn, A. (2001). Agile Software Development: The Business of Innovation. Computer, 34(9), 120-127.
• Rau, R. (2010). The Agile-Stage-Gate hybrid model: a case study. International Journal of Project Management, 28(3), 259-267.
• Royce, W. W. (1970). Managing the Development of Large Software Systems. In Proceedings of IEEE WESCON, 26, 1-9.