Dynamic Systems Development Method and Methodology
Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and Design (NIMSAD)
MM
A Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) and Dynamic System Development Method (DSDM) Comparison
Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and Design (NIMSAD)
MM
A Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) and Dynamic System Development Method (DSDM) Comparison
08
Fall
08
Fall
Table of Contents Introduction 1 Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) 3 Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM) 5 Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and Design (NIMSAD) 7 Methodology Context 8 Use Situation 8 Start of Methodology Use 9 Customers and Problem Owners 10 Context Description 10 Culture and Politics of Methodology Use 10 Risks in Describing Context 11 Risks of Methodology 11 Methodology User 12 User Motives and Values 12 Needed Abstract Reasoning 13 Needed Skills 13 Methodology 13 Problem Situation and Boundaries 13 Diagnosis of the Situation 14 Prognosis of System 14 Problem Defining 15 Deriving Notional Systems 15 Design 16 Implementation 16 Evaluation 17 More on NIMSAD… 17 Conclusion 18 References 18
Introduction
There are many methodologies to systems analysis and design. Each methodology differs from the other in many aspects including technical approaches, view of users and system environment, epistemology and ontology, suitability for use, etc. Hence a more structured and formal way of evaluating methodologies is by using the Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and Design (NIMSAD).
NIMSAD is well noted to have a “wide scope, not restricted to any particular category of methodologies, practical and considers different use situations” (Koskinen, Lintinen, Sivula and Tilus, 2003). In this paper, two methodologies are compared using the NIMSAD framework, the Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) from the waterfall approach family and the Dynamic Systems Development Methodology
MM
A Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) and Dynamic System Development Method (DSDM) Comparison
Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and Design (NIMSAD)
MM
A Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) and Dynamic System Development Method (DSDM) Comparison
08
Fall
08
Fall
Table of Contents Introduction 1 Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) 3 Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM) 5 Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and Design (NIMSAD) 7 Methodology Context 8 Use Situation 8 Start of Methodology Use 9 Customers and Problem Owners 10 Context Description 10 Culture and Politics of Methodology Use 10 Risks in Describing Context 11 Risks of Methodology 11 Methodology User 12 User Motives and Values 12 Needed Abstract Reasoning 13 Needed Skills 13 Methodology 13 Problem Situation and Boundaries 13 Diagnosis of the Situation 14 Prognosis of System 14 Problem Defining 15 Deriving Notional Systems 15 Design 16 Implementation 16 Evaluation 17 More on NIMSAD… 17 Conclusion 18 References 18
Introduction
There are many methodologies to systems analysis and design. Each methodology differs from the other in many aspects including technical approaches, view of users and system environment, epistemology and ontology, suitability for use, etc. Hence a more structured and formal way of evaluating methodologies is by using the Normative Information Model-based Systems Analysis and Design (NIMSAD).
NIMSAD is well noted to have a “wide scope, not restricted to any particular category of methodologies, practical and considers different use situations” (Koskinen, Lintinen, Sivula and Tilus, 2003). In this paper, two methodologies are compared using the NIMSAD framework, the Structured System Analysis and Design Method (SSADM) from the waterfall approach family and the Dynamic Systems Development Methodology
References: UK Essays. (2012). A DSDM Outline Plan. Available: http://www.ukessays.com/essays/information-technology/a-dsdm-outline-plan.php. Last accessed 21st November 2012. AGILE Methods of Software Development. (2011). Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM). Available: http://dsdmofagilemethodology.wikidot.com/. Last accessed 21st November 2012. UK Essays. (2011). Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM).Available: http://www.ukessays.co.uk/essays/information-system/dynamic-system-development-method.php. Last accessed 22nd November 2012. Haravtar. (2011). SSADM for Compiled SAAD. Available: http://www.scribd.com/doc/51400525/12/SSADM-Structured-Systems-Analysis-and-Design-Method. Last accessed 21st November 2012. Diane Strode. (2006). Agile methods: a comparative analysis. Available: http://www.citrenz.ac.nz/conferences/2006/papers/257.pdf. Last accessed 21st November 2012. Wikipedia. (2012). Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM). Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_systems_development_method. Last accessed 21st November 2012. Jussi Koskinen, Heikki Lintinen, Henna Sivula, Tero Tilus. (2003). Evaluation of Software Modernization Estimation Methods Using NIMSAD Meta Framework. Eltis Project. 1.0 (1), p1-12. Peter Bielkowicz, Preeti Patel and Thein Than Tun. (2002). Evaluating Information Systems Development Methods: A New Framework. Available: ftp://144.32.41.4/pub/xchge/evaluate.pdf. Last accessed 21st November 2012. Forsell, M., Halttunen, V. & Ahonen, J. (1999). Evaluation of component- based software development methodologies. Penjam, J. (Ed.) Proceedings of the Fenno-Ugric Symposium on Software Technology (FUSST’99) Marko Forsell. (2002). Improving Component Reuse in Software Development. JYVÄSKYLÄ Studies in Computing. 16 (1), 167.