Methods Of Top-Down And Bottom-Up Development, Prototyping, Spiral, UP, And XP Development Approaches, JAD Incorporation, And Personnel Required During Systems Implementation

Below are the questions. I do NOT need Abstract, Introduction, or Conclusion sections. So do not include that.

1. Discuss in scholarly detail how methods of top-down and bottom-up development can be applied to object-oriented software.

2. Discuss in scholarly detail common characteristics of the prototyping, spiral, UP, and XP development approaches. What are their differences?

3. Discuss in scholarly detail how JAD should be incorporated into the prototyping or spiral approaches to software development.

4. Discuss in scholarly detail why you think additional personnel are generally required during the later stages of systems implementation? In addition, how do training activities differ between end users and system operators? Why?

Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches

Top-down and bottom-up are the two approaches to software development or the object-oriented programming.

The top-down approach software development approach

The top-down approach basically breaks down of the system into multiple sub-systems and this approach leads to reverse engineering of the system. Each and every subsystem is taken into consideration and is treated as an individual system (Haken, 2013). Again those sub-systems are dispersed or better say decomposed. This procedure keeps on continuing until the lowest level of the aforesaid top-down approach hierarchy is reached.

The top-down approach initiates with a general model and it illustrates the subsystems coming along with it on progress. When all the associated sub-systems are finished executing, the whole system’s design can come to the existence (Zhang et al., 2014). The top-down approach is applicable for the software where the software developers are planned to be designed from scratch or from the start and the details of the websites are not known.

The bottom-up approach software development approach

The bottom-up approach involves composing of the more complicated system by utilizing and accumulating various subsystems. Thus it is an emerging system. Bottom-up processing is one type of processing which deals with the data processing and this data processing is based completely on the incoming data. The components at the higher level get created and the process goes on until the components get merged to a single component (Li et al., 2013). The quantity of abstraction goes on increasing with the level it goes higher. This approach is applicable in the case where the software developers are willing to build software on the existing system, unlike the top-down approach where the software developers develop software from scratch.

The bottom-up approach and the top-down approaches are not used simultaneously, instead, the software developers use both the bottom-up approach and the top-down approach altogether (Gong et al., 2014). This is the way all the software gets developed in recent times.

Prototyping model approach

The prototype model helps to identify the prerequisites for the software development. The software development if not follows the prototype model can get freezes, the code can be faulty and the entire software can malfunction. It may happen that the clients even can refuse the software. Therefore, building a prototype model before the development of a project is an absolute necessity (Aksenov et al., 2015). The enterprise can better understand the software design, also the management team can be well aware of the system design, the clients will get the opportunity to explain the things well, can propose any change as well if required. The software developers can get an overall view which needs to be done, what our clients' needs, in this way the software can be well executed or finished with efficiency. That will reduce the risk of project failure. The prototype model is not the complete system, it is simply the design, it is the model based on which the original software is built.

Spiral model approach

The spiral model prescribed is the risk-driven procedure model generator which assists in the identifying the risk pattern by which a certain project success or failure can be evaluated, the performance of a particular project undertaken can be known. In this away any enterprise can assess the productivity of the company (Simmons, 2013). The spiral model of the company contains the four phases- they are identification, design, construct or build, evaluation and the risk analysis. The phase involves the communication with the clients and to understand the requirements of the project, the design involves the design and development of the product, the constructor build phase demonstrates that the build of software and sending of software to the clients for the clients' approval. In this way, subsequent tasks are completed and at the end, the entire project gets completed.

Prototyping Model Approach

UP development approach

The Unified Software Process Development software is a framework build extensively for the particular organization and particular project in mind and it contains the three processes namely elaboration, construction and the transition phase to successfully accomplish the project.

XP development approach

Extreme Programming is the procedure by which the software quality can be enhanced to the next level and it has the capability to fulfil the customers' requirements. The methodology they use is the agile software methodology (Lassenius, Dingsøyr & Paasivaara, 2015). The methodology differs from all other methodologies and is way ahead of all other traditional methodologies. It basically defines all the requirements of the project pretty early and effort is made to control the changes of the requirements. It is basically an Agile methodology that can enhance the software development to the next level, it focuses on the good quality and the good responsiveness to the changing customer demands.

Joint Application Development (JAD) and its role

Joint Application Development is the process by which the design of the information technology can be greatly enhanced. JAD is associated with the customer involvement and thus JAD has the capability to define the users' requirements to fulfil the business needs and develop the best solution. JAD provides the facility to prepare documents so it enhances the business procedures. JAD combines the informational technology and the business needs, thus JAD brings in a new revolution to the workforce. JAD is basically adopted at the time of the adoption of new systems, it is used to purchase a system and it is used for system conversions (Hassan, Qamar & Idris, 2015). The enterprises who want to embellish the future of the enterprise adopt the JAD technology.

The participants of JAD are executive sponsor whose job role is to control and monitor the entire system of the enterprise and looking for scope were JAD can be used to prosper their business. The facilitator is another JAD participant who decides the success or failure of the system who has adopted JAD. The IT representatives provide the technical advice how JAD can be used to fulfil the business needs.

The JAD lifecycle consists of the following phases- The planning phase defines the needs of JAD for the system, illustrates the scope of the session, it involves the selection of team members who can imply JAD effectively. The next phase contains the schedule design, conduction of kick-off meeting, preparation of resources for JAD, the design session contains the analysis of the project scope and the develop a prototype based on the design plan. Later the decisions, the problems and the risks are taken into consideration and proper mitigation procedures planning to check those issues raised (Maheshwaran et al., 2017). The finalization involves the completion of design documents, proper sign off on the sign documents, making a presentation based on that, later obtaining the executive sponsor's approval to further progress, and lastly, the finalization involves the evaluation of JAD process.

The benefits that JAD provides are JAD accelerates design; JAD enhanced the quality of work, creation of design from the perception of the customers (Childs, 2013). JAD lowers down the development cost and the maintenance cost. JAD promotes the teamwork as well.

Spiral Model Approach

The JAD process can be made successful by making the facilitator of the enterprise has the sound knowledge of the JAD process, along with that it must be noticed the participants are well trained of the JAD procedure, they must prepare the JAD documents for the plan, must take into account the issues raised and the probable solutions to mitigate those risks.

Thus JAD can play a significant role in prototyping and spiral approach, in case of prototyping the JAD can give the overview of the project undertaken beforehand. In case of spiral model approach, the risks can be learned beforehand and those risks can be avoided while working on the project.

Additional personnel necessary for the system implementation on the later phase or stage

Numerous labour-intensive operations are performed at the time of installing, switching to a relatively new system and testing of the system (Wickboldt et al., 2017). Any kind of phased installation and parallel installation enhances the number of those operations.

The difference in training activities between the end users and the system operators

End-user training stresses hands-on system training via which the business objectives can be met and business activities can be accomplished. The training in accordance with the business framework is as necessary as training in the specimens of the system. Many end users encourage one-to-many classroom training programs; they also encourage train-the-trainer study approach (Shariatzadeh, Mandal & Srivastava, 2015). The divergent skills and the divergent experience levels assist in the emergence of a variety of training methodologies and the training materials.

The system operators generally avoid the business scenario and the business framework. The operators do not want classroom-based training rather they want to follow the self-study based training methodologies.

References

Aksenov, V. V., Walter, A. V., Gordeyev, A. A., & Kosovets, A. V. (2015). Classification of geokhod units and systems based on product cost analysis and estimation for a prototype model production. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (Vol. 91, No. 1, p. 012088). IOP Publishing.

Childs, H. (2013). VisIt: An end-user tool for visualizing and analyzing very large data.

Gong, Y., Yang, S., Zhan, L., Ma, L., Vajtai, R., & Ajayan, P. M. (2014). A Bottom?Up Approach to Build 3D Architectures from Nanosheets for Superior Lithium Storage. Advanced Functional Materials, 24(1), 125-130.

Haken, H. (2013). Synergetic computers and cognition: A top-down approach to neural nets (Vol. 50). Springer Science & Business Media.

Hassan, S., Qamar, U., & Idris, M. A. (2015, September). Purification of requirement engineering model for rapid application development. In Software Engineering and Service Science (ICSESS), 2015 6th IEEE International Conference on (pp. 357-362). IEEE.

Lassenius, C., Dingsøyr, T., & Paasivaara, M. (2015). Agile processes, in software engineering, and extreme programming. In Proceedings of 16th international conference, XP.

Li, W., Zheng, G., Yang, Y., Seh, Z. W., Liu, N., & Cui, Y. (2013). High-performance hollow sulfur nanostructured battery cathode through a scalable, room temperature, one-step, bottom-up approach. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(18), 7148-7153.

Maheshwaran, P., Kumar, R., Rajeswari, S., & Mungara, J. (2017). A Review on Requirement Engineering in Rapid Application Development.

Shariatzadeh, F., Mandal, P., & Srivastava, A. K. (2015). Demand response for sustainable energy systems: A review, application and implementation strategy. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 45, 343-350.

Simmons, B. A. (2013). From ratification to compliance: quantitative evidence on the spiral model. The persistent power of human rights: From commitment to compliance.

Wickboldt, J. A., Guerreiro, M. Q., Granville, L. Z., Gaspary, L. P., Schwarz, M. F., Guok, C., ... & MacAuley, J. (2017). MEICAN: Simplifying DCN Life-Cycle Management from End-User and Operator Perspectives in Inter-Domain Environments. IEEE Communications Magazine.

Zhang, X., Yang, L. T., Liu, C., & Chen, J. (2014). A scalable two-phase top-down specialization approach for data anonymization using mapreduce on cloud. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 25(2), 363-373.