Waterfall Method vs. Iterative Model
Big Bang finish can be difficult for users. (W/I)
waterfall method
Can be difficult to change the design. (W/I)
waterfall method
Each stage is well documented. (W/I)
waterfall method
Easier to schedule. (W/I)
waterfall method
No customer feedback. (W/I)
waterfall method
No finished product until the very end. (W/I)
waterfall method
Requires very stable requirements. (W/I)
waterfall method
Simple methodology good for short projects. (W/I)
waterfall method
Unidirectional. (W/I)
waterfall method
When things fall behind schedule, the implementation and testing teams lose time. (W/I)
waterfall method
Waterfall Method: Step 4
testing
Waterfall Method: Step 1
requirements
Waterfall Method: Step 5
deployment & maintenance
Waterfall Method: Step 2
design
Waterfall Method: Step 3
implementation
Allows constant reflection on the process and team. (W/I)
iterative model
Allows customer feedback and requirements changes. (W/I)
iterative model
Allows for feedback. (W/I)
iterative model
Allows more flexibility. (W/I)
iterative model
Break the project up into small iterations. (W/I)
iterative model
Costs are harder to predict. (W/I)
iterative model
Documentation requires more flexible and experienced employees. (W/I)
iterative model
Encourages modularity. (W/I)
iterative model
Keeps the customer constantly involved. (W/I)
iterative model
More difficult to schedule and manage. (W/I)
iterative model
Multi-stage delivery easier on users to adapt. (W/I)
iterative model
Requires a lot of customer interaction. (W/I)
iterative model
Requires more flexible and experienced employees. (W/I)
iterative model
