Approaching to Programming Team - Coursework Example

Approaches to Programming Teams Introduction Programming is important in any organization or business firm. There are various methodologies that can be relied on for team programming. Good programming is important in ensuring there is proper flow of information into any organization’s operating systems. There are many approaches that programming teams can take when they are seeking to develop an information system. The information system developed needs to be provided with enough data and information that is reliable. The process usually calls for formation of programming teams that would play part in the entire procedure. This paper is going to look into three programming team methodologies that are used by business firms and teams to conduct a development in software or information systems. Extreme Programming (XP) It is not always guaranteed that the environment in which a particular information system is going to work in is stable. Sometimes we have working environments where changes are always recorded after a short period of time. The extreme programming methodology (XP) is appropriate in these cases[Ahm13]. The reason why the XP model is the best option in such scenarios is the core objective that this approach usually has. Extreme programming is usually directed towards establishing a procedure through which software and information systems can be developed in a flexible manner. The idea here is that whenever changes are to be made to the information systems used by programming teams, they are done without putting the organization being served through many risks[Rod121]. The XP methodology is also determined to make sure that the costs of introducing new ideas to the software systems are low. The approach is implemented through consideration of five standard values that are necessary for success of a team. Courage is one of the values that the extreme programming approach puts emphasis on. As per this model, one requires courage to make some decisions that the organization or team would depend on for success[Rod12]. It is the team members who do not fear that would take bold steps to stop unproductive ideas from being implemented through team programming. The value of being courageous also makes it possible for team players to come up with constructive ideas that can be nurtured to become great innovations in the information systems and programming. Communication is another quality that the extreme programming approach advocates for as a key determinant of development in a team. According to this approach, implementation of a program is easier and faster when there is good communication between the users of this program and the developers. Therefore, there is need to ensure there is effective communication channels that would ensure all the stakeholders are well informed about the system being introduced. Keeping customers aware about the organization’s operations is also possible through a good communication avenue[Rez13]. The other value that this approach puts emphasis on is the delivery of feedback after communication is made. The quality of the information system that one seeks to implement can be determined through considering the feedback that the customers and users of the new system give back. Therefore, this model pushes for the management of any information system or operational program to give the clients chance to react to any new implementation. Giving room for feedbacks would always make communication among team members easier. When communication between members of a programming team is complete with feedbacks, collaboration in the teams is also instilled. Thus it is important that feedback be considered as a key value as stated in the XP methodology. The fourth value that the model advocates as a key element is respect. Respects starts with every team member respecting his or her position and role in the team. After this, it will be possible for the members to respect each other’s duties and participations[Sch11]. Respect within members of a programming team is useful in ensuring collaboration among team members. It becomes easy to coordinate work from distributed members of programming teams if there is respect of the work done[Por13]. The other quality that the XP methodology believes makes an important part in conducting the process of developing a system of delivering information is simplicity. According to the extreme programming model, the processes and information systems to be introduced into an organization’s operations are supposed to be simple[Fon15]. Simplicity should be in terms of developing the systems, implementing them, and improving them later on. When the details are made simple, it becomes possible to make sure the entire programming is flexible. When the procedures are flexible enough, it even becomes economical when changes are to be made in the work done by the programming team. The XP model also aims at reducing the charges incurred when some changes are to be implemented[Com11]. System development life cycle (SDLC) This programming team methodology puts its emphasis on project management with concern on the information flow into the organization. The SDLC approach has it that importance should be rested on the process of identifying a new information system for any organization. The process involves all the team members at different levels. The customers and clients to be served by the new systems are also involved in the approach. Examples of models under this approach include the Joint Application Development and the Waterfall Model. The following are the steps that are taken under this methodology[Pes12]. In a scenario where a team has been using software and information systems but improvement is to be made, the first step is analyzing the current systems. The challenges and shortcomings of the systems being used by the programming teams are highlighted after an analysis has been conducted[Sch12]. The second stage in this approach is finding solutions to the defaults that had been noticed earlier on in the first step. At this level, the team members think of the materials and information needed to correct the deficiencies of the initial system. It is also at this point that the requirements of the new information systems are noted. Sometimes, only improvements are enough for the information systems used by the teams to be more effective. After the requirements have been identified, the next step is usually availing of the requirements for developing of the new systems or improving the old ones. With the availability of all that is needed, it now becomes possible to prepare a proposal for the development of the system that the programming team wants implemented. The required hardware, software, and operating systems are among the things that must be made available[van14]. Developing of the proposed system follows after all the required materials and information are provided. The programs and parts are issued to professionals who act on them to provide the organization with the best possible information system. Installation is done and immediately programs are supposed to be running as information flow is examined. The SDLC model requires that the programming team be competent enough to be able to use the high quality software the new system will be relying on. Eventually, the developed system is put into use with a lot of scrutiny during the first days of operation. The reason for doing this is to ensure any area that was not acted upon properly is corrected before it is late. The SDLC methodology works with the assumption that a clear and effective procedure of coming up with an information system is the major requirement for programming[Fon15]. The Agile Methodology Under this methodology, emphasis is on how the teams are coordinated through communication. In most cases, this approach looks into how team players are coordinated to ensure work flow is organized even if there was division of work[Pen111]. The agile methodology also looks into how geographically distributed teams can be connected to work like a co-located team. Therefore, the approach aims at locating workers and team players into one area where communication can be done instantly. There are various models under the agile methodology. An example of these models is the Scrum Model[HuQ14]. This approach of team programming seeks to reduce the risks of operating software. In the agile methodology, this is made possible by the use of various short timeboxes. In this methodology, there are a number of stages that can be followed to help check on the risks of operating the software or information systems. For example, it all starts with breaking down the project into short sections called iterations. Managing of the program becomes easier through these sections since they are usually analyzed within a month. Regular evaluation is important in ensuring the programming is done effectively. In this sections referred to as iterations, short functions are done that end up forming the entire project. The requirements of the information system are usually analyzed at this point. Other activities undertaken at the iterations include preparation of the necessary documentations and analyzing the design that is going to be adapted. After close to a month, focus is shift to another time box having completed the functions of the prior one. The whole software or information system is again evaluated after all the iterations would be completed[Mel13]. The basis of operation of this methodology is creation of a communication channel that would enable real-time communication. Therefore, the approach given by this methodology is that programming teams should be organized in a way that makes the communication between team members a one-on-one deal. To help in creating real-time communication, programming done under this methodology requires the formation of bullpens. Bullpens help team players to synchronize their activities and operations so that even distributed members are enabled to communicate on real-time basis. The differences between the three methodologies System development life cycle (SDLC) Extreme Programming (XP) The Agile Methodology 1). The main area of discussion is the procedure of creating a programming system 1). The main area of consideration is the values that are necessary for development of a system successfully. 1). Having a real-time communication avenue in the programming team is the main concern. 2). Cost of developing and implementing systems is not considered. 2). The costs of coming up with new systems and improving initial ones is considered. 2). Cost of developing and implementing systems is not considered. 3). How the programming team members communicate is not restricted to one-on-one basis. 3). How the programming team members communicate is not restricted to one-on-one basis. 3). Communication among the team members is aimed at being of a real-time basis. 4). Team members working from dispersed locations can work together through coordination. 4). Team members can be coordinated to work together from globally dispersed regions. 4). In this methodology focus is to bring together team workers so that they seem to work as if they are located in same place. The similarities of the three methodologies System development life cycle (SDLC) Extreme Programming (XP) The Agile Methodology 1). Customers participate in the programming process when they are being interviewed concerning the systems they have been using. 1). Participation of the customers is encouraged by giving them room to deliver their feedback about the knowledge they get from these systems. 1). Participation of the customers is encouraged by making them members of the bullpens used in this methodology. 2). The approach is aimed at improving programming teams by introducing better information systems and software. 2). The approach is aimed at coming up with more developed software and information systems for the programming teams by emphasizing the critical values. 2).The management of project workers is coordinated through real-time communication. Through this the operation of the teams is improved. All the three methodologies highlighted here are very useful in programming teams. The best approach is the extreme programming which involves analyzing the important values to be considered when the entire activity is being carried out. The fact that it highlights the crucial values that a programming team has to adhere to in order to be successful makes it the best approach. The difference for global, virtual and co-located programming teams The extents to which these teams use technology in their operations vary. The most dispersed team members are expected to embrace more advanced technologies than the co-located team members. Therefore, the global programming teams have advanced technologies and software in their operations. On the other hand, the co-located teams don’t have a lot of these improvised systems. Virtual programming teams are usually using technologies that enable team members coordinate despite the distances[Mur11]. The awareness of the team members on their roles also varies depending on the closeness of the team members. The globally distributed programming teams that are not well coordinated have their members not well-informed about the roles they have to play. Co-located teams are easier to communicate to thus the members are aware of their roles. The case for co-located workers is similar to that of virtual teams[Mur11]. Conclusion Proper utilization of the three methodologies discussed in this paper is important if organizations are to benefit from the methods. For instance, when using the extreme programming approach one has to make sure the five key values are adhered to for the programming procedure to be successful. Consideration of the locality of the team members is also important before making a decision on which approach to use in programming. References Ahm13: , (Ahmed & Jindal, 2013), Rod121: , (Rodriguez, Sicilia, & Garcia, 2012), Rod12: , (Rodriguez & Sicilia, 2012), Rez13: , (Rezaei, Ortt, & Scholten, 2013), Sch11: , (Schulte & Davison, Active documents with org-mode, 2011), Por13: , (Porter, Guzdial, McDowell, & Simon, 2013), Fon15: , (Fontana, Meyer, & Reinehr, 2015), Com11: , (Comstock, Jiang, & Davies, 2011), Pes12: , (Pesant, 2012), Sch12: , (Schulte, Davison, Dye, & Dominik, 2012), van14: , (van de Kaa, Rezaei, & Kamp, 2014), Pen111: , (Pendharkar & Rodger, 2011), HuQ14: , (Hu & Lim, 2014), Mel13: , (Melo, Cruzes, & Kon, 2013), Mur11: , (Murali, Kundu, & Bairi, 2011), Read More