Crystal Methodology Critique, Benefits and limitations
Crystal methodology was first bound by Cockburn in 1998. In crystal, the projects are divided according to their size and the criticality of the system being produced (Ramsin & Paige, 2008). Member of the crystal family is marked with a color to show the weight of the methodology, that means the darker the color the heavier the methodology. Crystal recommends choosing the appropriate color of methodology for a project based on its size and criticality. In crystal the larger the project, the more coordination and heavier methodologies required. There are four levels of criticality to indicate a potential loss or failure in the system: Comfort ( C ), Discretionary money(D), Essential Money …show more content…
Crystal Orange was introduced in 1998 targeting C40, D40 and E40 projects and suggest a wide range of main roles needed in the project (Cockburn, 2002). The roles are grouped into many teams, such as system planning, project mentoring, architecture, technology, functions, infrastructure and external test teams, and are further divided into cross-functional groups comprising diverse roles (Cockburn, 2002). According to Cockburn (2002), Crystal Orange Web is a type of Crystal Orange aiming continuous web development projects in which a continuous stream of deliverables is produced over an indefinite time span. Finally, Crystal Clear is the lightest and most broadly used member of the family and primarily targeted at C6 and D6 projects (Ramsin & Paige, 2008). There is only one development team, with members working near each other. Usable software is delivered at least once every three months, though delivery is typically expected to be much more frequent. In Crystal Clear the main roles requiring separate persons are: sponsor, senior designer-programmer, designer-programmer and user (Cockburn 2002).
These are the summery of the advantages or benefits of crystal methodologies which are the principle of the methodology.
• Frequent delivery: - is the regular releasing of iterations of the software program. Releasing iterations benefit stakeholders to be …show more content…
For example, Crystal Clear has a restricted communication structure and is thus suitable for only for a single team located in a single office space. Moreover, Crystal Clear lacks system validation elements and is thus not suitable for life-critical systems. Crystal Orange also requires its teams to be found in a single office building and can deliver only a system maximum of discretionary money in the level of criticality. It also lacks in its sub-team structures and, as such, is suitable for projects involving up to 40 persons and it is not very capable regarding design- and code-verification activities and thus not suitable for life critical systems (Abrahamsson, Salo, Ronkainen, Warsta, 2017).
Reference:
Abrahamsson, P., Salo, O., Ronkainen, J., & Warsta, J. (2017). Agile software development methods: Review and analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.08439.
Cockburn, A. (2002). Agile software development (Vol. 177). Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Cockburn, A. (2000). Writing effective use cases, The crystal collection for software professionals. Addison-Wesley Professional Reading.
Goodpasture, John C.. ( © 2010). Project management the agile way: making it work in the enterprise. [Books24x7 version] Available from http://common.books24x7.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/toc.aspx?bookid=37809.
Ramsin, R., & Paige, R. F. (2008). Process-centered review
Crystal methodology was first bound by Cockburn in 1998. In crystal, the projects are divided according to their size and the criticality of the system being produced (Ramsin & Paige, 2008). Member of the crystal family is marked with a color to show the weight of the methodology, that means the darker the color the heavier the methodology. Crystal recommends choosing the appropriate color of methodology for a project based on its size and criticality. In crystal the larger the project, the more coordination and heavier methodologies required. There are four levels of criticality to indicate a potential loss or failure in the system: Comfort ( C ), Discretionary money(D), Essential Money …show more content…
Crystal Orange was introduced in 1998 targeting C40, D40 and E40 projects and suggest a wide range of main roles needed in the project (Cockburn, 2002). The roles are grouped into many teams, such as system planning, project mentoring, architecture, technology, functions, infrastructure and external test teams, and are further divided into cross-functional groups comprising diverse roles (Cockburn, 2002). According to Cockburn (2002), Crystal Orange Web is a type of Crystal Orange aiming continuous web development projects in which a continuous stream of deliverables is produced over an indefinite time span. Finally, Crystal Clear is the lightest and most broadly used member of the family and primarily targeted at C6 and D6 projects (Ramsin & Paige, 2008). There is only one development team, with members working near each other. Usable software is delivered at least once every three months, though delivery is typically expected to be much more frequent. In Crystal Clear the main roles requiring separate persons are: sponsor, senior designer-programmer, designer-programmer and user (Cockburn 2002).
These are the summery of the advantages or benefits of crystal methodologies which are the principle of the methodology.
• Frequent delivery: - is the regular releasing of iterations of the software program. Releasing iterations benefit stakeholders to be …show more content…
For example, Crystal Clear has a restricted communication structure and is thus suitable for only for a single team located in a single office space. Moreover, Crystal Clear lacks system validation elements and is thus not suitable for life-critical systems. Crystal Orange also requires its teams to be found in a single office building and can deliver only a system maximum of discretionary money in the level of criticality. It also lacks in its sub-team structures and, as such, is suitable for projects involving up to 40 persons and it is not very capable regarding design- and code-verification activities and thus not suitable for life critical systems (Abrahamsson, Salo, Ronkainen, Warsta, 2017).
Reference:
Abrahamsson, P., Salo, O., Ronkainen, J., & Warsta, J. (2017). Agile software development methods: Review and analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.08439.
Cockburn, A. (2002). Agile software development (Vol. 177). Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Cockburn, A. (2000). Writing effective use cases, The crystal collection for software professionals. Addison-Wesley Professional Reading.
Goodpasture, John C.. ( © 2010). Project management the agile way: making it work in the enterprise. [Books24x7 version] Available from http://common.books24x7.com.ezproxy.umuc.edu/toc.aspx?bookid=37809.
Ramsin, R., & Paige, R. F. (2008). Process-centered review