Project Management Consulting Solutions For Clients In Various Industries

Client A: Agile Methodology Implementation for IT Projects

Introduction

Agile methodology corresponds to the iterative development process in which a software is developed step by step. On the other hand, waterfall methodology is a software development method that is done is complete phases that include development and testing (Komai, Saidi & Nakanishi, 2016). As per Adam’s statement mentioned in Case A, agile methodology is specifically designed for IT projects due to the changing user requirements in the IT industry.

In this essay, an argumentative discussion has been made regarding the validity of Adam’s statement.

Client A deals with IT projects in both website and mobile segments, specializing in the development of websites and softwares for mobile phones. However, the problem presented by the client is that the requirements of the mobile users are constantly changing at a rapid pace and hence, the client’s development section has to deal with development of the same software for several times (Siqueira, Reinehr & Malucelli, 2017). However, this problem can be solved by agile methodology due to several of its functions. The main advantage is that since agile methodology follows iterative development process, the course of the development can be changed after a certain iteration if the user requirement changes. This advantage is not possible in waterfall model as the in this case, the entire development process must be completed before making any changes (Kassab, 2014). This not only requires much additional time but also incurs extra costs. Again, agile methodology is specially targeted on the product whereas the waterfall model is specially focused on the project itself. Hence, waterfall methodology cannot adapt to constant changes in the user requirement whereas the agile methodology mainly grows on changes made during the iterations (McInerney, 2017). In each iteration, the development acts as a mini-software and can be processed and tested for further changes before proceeding to the next iteration. IT industry is changing at a rapid pace each day and along with it, the changes of user requirements are also accelerating. Although this is not much noticed in case of websites, the changes are very much evident on the mobile applications where the user changes his requirements to suit the needs of the market (Kannan, Jhajharia & Verma, 2014). Hence, the best possible methodology for IT projects is Agile Methodology and it can be implemented in all the development sections of client A instead of using Waterfall or any other traditional models. The agile methodology will suit the changing needs and will also save a lot of cost or time for the company to adapt with the current market.

Client B: Tailored Construction Management Methodologies

Conclusion

From the analysis, it can be concluded that Adam’s statement is indeed true i.e. agile methodology is specifically designed for the IT projects. Agile methodology can easily adapt to constant changes and still perform iterations step by step unless the desired end product is obtained. Even after obtaining the end product, the software can be further sent for further changes for suiting the needs of the customers and it will again pass through several iterations.

Introduction

PMBoK approach to a project management is mainly based on the waterfall methodology that includes step by step development of the project in distinct project phases. Generally, there are five phases in the waterfall model that include initiating, planning, executing, monitoring and control and closing (Snyder, 2014). Technical projects, including construction projects require such phase by phase development in order complete all the project aspects successfully. As per the statement of PMBoK, the planning of the project is to be done only once and the project managers must go through each of the steps mentioned in the approach.

In this essay, the validity of the statement of PMBoK has been discussed and relevant arguments have been put forward with respect to the given case of the client B.

Based on the analysis of the case presented by client B, the argument of PMBoK can be both beneficial and misleading. As per the PMBoK statement of methodology, the project planning should be done only once. However, for the construction project, as per the client words, there may be some changes required as the project is ongoing as per their client’s requests. For the waterfall method, such changes cannot be made once the project is started. On the other hand, there are certain benefits as well (Rui et al., 2016). The first benefit is that the waterfall model provides a certain architecture model to the project managers who do not understand how the project can be executed in the right order. As per the methodology, there are five distinct stages that can be followed for construction projects. However, for this architecture model to work for the project, the organization should contact with the client after the project plan is ready to ensure whether any changes are needed or not. When the client approves the plan, the project is set to go ahead and enter the next phase named execution. The second benefit of the waterfall approach is that at the end of each phase, there is a chance of review of the progress of the project (Chaves et al., 2016). Hence, the statement presented in the case can certainly be agreeable if the client B’s situation is analyzed.

Client C: Streamlined Project Approaches for Tax Services

The PMBoK approach for Client B can tailored in a way that will be suitable for the types of projects that the client handles. A proposed approach that follows a number of steps or phases is shown as follows.

Phase 1: Initiation

• Meeting with client
• Discussion over project
• Presentation of requirements
• Feasibility check
• Contract signing

Phase 2: Planning

• Requirement analysis
• Scheduling
• Budgeting
• Preparation of blue print
• Approval of blue print and design by client
• Formation of project team

Phase 3: Execution

• Hiring of contractors for project
• Initiation of project work
• Follow blue print and design for the development and design of the building

Phase 4: Monitoring and Control

• Monitor project progress
• Control project
• Prevent scope creep
• Review project progress

Phase 5: Closing

• Post-project review
• User acceptance
• Project hand over
• Sign Off

In this methodology, as per the general waterfall model, five distinct phases have been defined along with the activities. Since Client B manages engineering and construction projects, the activities have been specifically defined for construction and design of buildings (Karaman & Kurt, 2015). Client B in the meeting also stated the activities that his organization needs to perform in the course of the projects. These activities have been arranged and tailored to suit the architecture provided by the PMBoK method or waterfall model.

The proposed methodology will have significant impact on the stakeholders who will be involved in the project. Since the project is now defined in distinct five phases, one stakeholder must fulfill his duties successfully so that the next stakeholder can start work on the same i.e. in this methodology, the performance of one stakeholder will now significantly affected by the performance of the other stakeholders (Ohshima, 2015). Three main stakeholders on whom the proposed methodology will have significant impact are discussed as follows.

Project Manager – Previously, in the client B’s company, the project manager had no distinct role or well defined responsibility. As a whole, the project manager needed to manage all aspects on the project from start to the end as well as monitor the progress of the project. However, with the proposed methodology, the responsibilities will be evenly distributed on the stakeholders and hence, the project manager will now have distinct roles and responsibilities to fulfill (Rosa et al., 2016). The project manager will now need to take part in the project initiation and the control phase. In the initial phase, the project manager will need to discuss the project with the client and prepare the project plan accordingly and in the control phase, he will need to monitor the project progress and control it accordingly.

Supervisor – In the proposed methodology, the supervisor will also play an important role in ensuring the success of the project. The supervisor will have the duty to supervise the project, prepare project reports and report to the project manager on a frequent basis (Richter, 2015). It will be the role of the supervisor to ensure the project is executed in the right manner and the project manager is updated with the project progress.

Client D: Identifying and Addressing Issues with Teaching

Human Resource Manager – Human resources play an important role in the execution of the project and the selection of able and skilled human resources is necessary (Varajão, Colomo-Palacios & Silva, 2017). In the proposed methodology, the human resource manager will have the specific duty of appointing technically skilled workers or hiring suitable contractors based on feasible and beneficial project contract.

Conclusion

In this essay, the argument stated earlier has been agreed upon based on the provided case study of Client B. Following the methodology stated by PMBoK, the waterfall model has been duly applied to the case study and a specific architecture model has been provided to the client. As per the project requirements of client B, the provided methodology can be very suitable if each step is followed in the right order.

Introduction

Client A is from a leading firm based on software development, which focuses on development of mobile website and various kinds of website. Client A is more focused in the development of online ordering and delivering system for various numbers of people or users (Kannan, Jhajharia & Verma, 2014). One the contrary Client C is from major accounting organization based in Australia which aims in specializing various kinds of tax services for business.

In this essay, a proper justification has been provided regarding the fact that agile methodology is considered to be best for both the clients that A and B.

Agile methodology is nothing but a practice which promotes various kinds of continuous iteration in the various phases of testing throughout the various phases of SDLC (Software Development Life Cycle) of a project. There are some principle values which are involved in agile SDLC like

• Provides interaction on basis of individual and team members which generally processes various kinds of tools.
• Responding to change rather following of a plan.  
• Responding to a change rather than following a particular plan.

There are large number of methods which are involved in agile testing that are scrum, eXtreme Programming (XP) and lastly FDD (feature driven Development). Scrum is a kind of agile development which focus on the fact of management of task within a particular team based environment of development (McInerney, 2017). There are certain numbers of steps involved for flow of scrum methodology that are:

• Each and every iteration in scrum methodology is known as Sprint.
• Backlog of product is nothing but a list where various kinds of details are entered so that one can easily get the end products.
• At the time of each sprint the best item of product backlog is selected and is changed into sprint backlog.
• At the end of sprint team mainly focus on delivering of various kinds of products

eXtreme Programming technique can be defined as a useful method which is used when there is continuous changing of demands or needs from various kinds of customers which provides assurance of the functionality of the system (Komai, Saidi & Nakanishi, 2016). It mainly focuses on release of various kinds of products in short development of life cycle which ultimately improves the productivity of a system and it also focus on introduction of checkpoints which can be used for analyzing the requirements of customer. There are generally six phases of extreme Programming:

• Planning
• Analysis
• Design
• Stakeholders
• Execution
• Wrapping  
• Closure

About Our Project Management Consulting Services

FDD stands for feature driven program is mainly focused in design and building features. FDD generally describes various kinds of specific feature which needs to be accomplished as per the feature. FDD products are as follows

• Modeling of domain object
• Development as per the need of the feature
• Management of various kinds of configuration.
• Visibility of various kinds of project and results.

Advantages of Agile Methodology

• Engagement of various type of stakeholders
• Transparency
• Prediction of cost and schedule
• Allows various kinds of changes
• Addresses on various value of business
• Improvises Quality

Disadvantage of Agile Methodology

• Using this particular methodology, it is hard to gather information which is needed for SDLC.
• There are some kind of drawbacks in designing and documents.
• Using this methodology, a project can be easily track off if the various representative is clear about the fact of the final outcome.
• In this methodology only senior coders are capable of taking a meaningful decision which is required in the development process and so there is no ground for new coders unless and until it combined with some kind of resource tools.

Agile methodology has been proposed for the client A and Client C as the business models of both the companies has been already defined and are less prone to change and thus it can be a beneficial aspect for both the clients. This methodology will ensure that the products and services those are being delivered will be of better quality and thus, enhance the performance of the organization (Kassab, 2014). This methodology will be helpful in testing the software developed and enhance the cooperation of the customers and engage them with the company. This will also help both the clients in ensuring the customer satisfaction through better and innovative products and services that could be made available for them through this methodology. Transparency, sprint meetings, and Jira usage are some of the beneficial aspects of this methodology that could be applicable for both the clients to enhance the project control. Project failure could be the biggest loss for both the clients and this methodology will ensure that the project does not fail by reducing the risks in an effective manner (Siqueira, Reinehr & Malucelli, 2017). As both the companies are less prone to changes this methodology will provide a window for both the clients to implement and execute changes in the middle of the project. Another beneficial factor for this implementation is the faster ROI that is the most crucial factor for any organization and thus, will be helpful in gaining output for both the clients.

Conclusion

From the above discussion it can be easily concluded that this report is all about suggesting a proper project management methodology for both clients A and B. Agile methodology has been suggested for both the client considering the fact that they are from different domain. Various phases of agile methodology have been discussed in details. All the different types of agile methodology that is scrum, extreme programming and FDD (feature driven development) have been discussed in detail in the above pages of the report. Various kinds of advantages and disadvantage of agile methodology has been discussed in details in above pages of the report. A proper justification has been provided regarding the fact that agile methodology can be helpful for both the clients that is A and B who are from different domain that is from accounting and software development firms.

Industries We Serve

Introduction

Continuous improvement is required in any organizational operation or project when there is positive influence or improvement with the existing system. In the provided case, there is an already deployed quality control method that seems to have no positive effect on the existing situation of the school. The current condition of decreasing student performance in the school is such that it cannot be just improved in a short period of time. Hence, continuous improvement is necessary so that all the issues and difficulties can be addressed gradually and the student performance also starts to increase (Fullan, 2016). Some realistic options for the school include the application of the quality control tools that have some defined key performance indicator (KPI) metrics that allows them to monitor student as well as teachers’ performance in the school effectively. In order to apply these quality control tools, the school needs to develop a suitable implementation plan and will also require involvement of the stakeholders including the parents and the teachers of the school.

In this report, the existing condition of the school has been analyzed and the use of the suitable quality control tools along with key performance indicators has been proposed. Along with it, a suitable implementation plan for continuous improvement of the school’s condition has also been proposed.

Tools and Techniques for Locating the Problem

As per the situation described by David, the main problem lies in the lack of sufficient performance monitoring of the students as well as the teachers. As per the analysis of the school, it is evident that role of the teachers employed in improving the students’ performance in the school is not yet known i.e. there is no specific key performance indicator defined for the teachers. For performance indication, the school relies on students’ evaluations – feedbacks provided by the students about their teachers at the end of each term. Based on the decreasing quality of performances of the students, it can be safely said that the students’ evaluations are no longer the correct metrics for evaluating the teachers’ performances (Current et al., 2017). The opinions are very much biased and fit as per the requirements of the students themselves. Moreover, there is also no performance metric for the students as well – the only way to measure the students’ performance is to evaluate the marks received by the students in the examinations. The students’ attendance, participations in group projects, performance inside the classroom programs and other educational activities are not monitored. Hence, for locating the cause of the problem and determine whether it is the fault of the teachers or the students, David has the option of choosing one or more quality control tools as follows.

• Cause and Effect Diagram and Analysis
• Check Sheet
• Control Chart
• Histogram
• Pareto Chart
• Scatter Diagram
• Stratification / Process Flow Diagram

Our Consulting Methodology

Tracking Key Performance Measures

All the quality control tools mentioned above can define key performance indicators if used properly with the right variables and constants. For instance, the cause and effect diagram will let David to analyze the resources spend behind each classroom program and the effects of the same on the students. In other words, David needs to analyze all the important aspects of the classroom including study materials provided, teachers employed, method of teaching used, environment of the classroom, technical teaching setup available and other parameters of a specific classroom program and then compare them with the performance of the student (Cohen-Vogel et al, 2016). If the causes are found to be the best possible way for students’ education, the fault should be from the students’ end and in the other case i.e. lack of sufficient educational inputs, the fault may lie in the faculty members or the school administration.

Out of the 7 quality control tools discussed, two control tools can be specifically deployed by David to achieve the intended goal of analyzing key performance indicators of the students. These two tools are discussed as follows.

Process Flow Diagram – Process Flow Diagram will provide David with a precise idea of measuring the performances of the students with respect to the flow of processes in the education system in the school. This will make it easier to identify the root of the problems and will allow David to make suitable changes in the current education system. The process flow diagram will include the flow of knowledge from the teacher to the student via various educational tools and methods and will also depend upon certain conditions (McLean, 2017). For instance, the amount of knowledge gained by a student from a teacher in a single class session will depend on the pressure of lesson applied for advancing on the curriculum as well as the attendance of the student in the class. If the student is absent, the knowledge imparted to him on that class is zero. Hence, using this tool will also require analysis of additional factors like students’ attendances, size of curriculum and others for identifying the problems with the performances of the students.

Control Chart – Control Chart is another tool that can be deployed by David for measuring the performance of the students and identifying the main problem areas. Control chart requires regular entry of numeric variables in a graph by the teachers for a particular constant. For instance, if the students are warned for not paying attention in class by the teachers, there can be control chart for the same. There will be standard and constant value for the number of warnings given to the students in each class (Goetsch & Davis, 2014). At the end of a certain period of time, the value positions in the graph will be connected to form a graphical representation and will provide a key performance indicator of the students. If the values at different points exceed the standard warning limit, it will mean that the students are not sufficiently paying attention to the lessons taught in class and if the values are too low from the standard limit, which will mean that the teachers are not caring enough to warn the students regarding attention to class.

Why Choose Us

Other than these quality control tools, there are other ways to monitor the performances of the students and the teachers in the classroom. The first possible tool that can be used is classroom monitoring using CCTV cameras where the classroom programs will be monitored by some specific faculty members. However, this will only provide an idea about the class room; it will not provide in-depth idea about the actual amount of knowledge imparted to the student or the performance of the teachers in educating the students (Mitra, 2016). Another possible tool that can be used by David is analytics tool. Analytics tool can process some statistical data and provide accurate estimations of more data parameters. In this case, the analytics tool can be used for processing students’ learning information, curriculum and other data to generate a suitable learning curve that will reflect the educational growth of the students in the class.

Continuous Improvement and Detailed Implementation Plan

For continuous improvement, the school needs to follow a specific methodology that will enable it to address the issues that have been identified till now. The continuous improvement process will consist of three main phases:

Assess – The school needs to assess performances of the teachers and students during the learning sessions as well as other related factors like curriculum, school hours, extracurricular activities and others.

Analyze – The school needs to analyze the areas of failure that lead to the decrease in the performances of the students.

Act – After identification of the problems, the school should take necessary steps in order to ensure the problems are addressed in the right manner and the students’ performances start to increase once again.

In order to validate the continuous improvement plan, a suitable implementation plan is required for the project. The detailed implementation plan for Client D can be shown in the following schedule table.

Task Name	Duration	Start	Finish
Implementation Plan for Client D	213 days	Tue 02-01-18	Thu 25-10-18
Planning	14 days	Tue 02-01-18	Fri 19-01-18
Meetings between Teachers and Parents	1 day	Tue 02-01-18	Tue 02-01-18
Identification of Problem Area	3 days	Wed 03-01-18	Fri 05-01-18
Development of initial plan to address issues	5 days	Mon 08-01-18	Fri 12-01-18
Analysis of Quality Control Tools	2 days	Mon 15-01-18	Tue 16-01-18
Selection of Suitable Quality Control Tools	2 days	Wed 17-01-18	Thu 18-01-18
Approval of the Quality Control Tool	1 day	Fri 19-01-18	Fri 19-01-18
Implementation	14 days	Mon 22-01-18	Thu 08-02-18
Analysis of Existing Classroom Condition	4 days	Mon 22-01-18	Thu 25-01-18
Analysis of Student Performance in Examinations	4 days	Fri 26-01-18	Wed 31-01-18
Implementation of Selected Tool/Tools	2 days	Thu 01-02-18	Fri 02-02-18
Determination of KPI of Teachers	2 days	Mon 05-02-18	Tue 06-02-18
Determination of KPI of Students	2 days	Wed 07-02-18	Thu 08-02-18
Monitoring	145 days	Fri 09-02-18	Thu 30-08-18
Monitoring Teaching Process	10 days	Fri 09-02-18	Thu 22-02-18
Monitoring Learning Process	10 days	Fri 23-02-18	Thu 08-03-18
Monitoring Teachers’ Performance during Theoritical and Practical Classes	25 days	Fri 09-03-18	Thu 12-04-18
Monitoring Student’s Performance in Class	25 days	Fri 13-04-18	Thu 17-05-18
Analysis of Different Effects on Student Performance	10 days	Fri 18-05-18	Thu 31-05-18
Analysis of the Curriculum	5 days	Fri 01-06-18	Thu 07-06-18
Monitoring the Educational Growth Curve of the Students	30 days	Fri 08-06-18	Thu 19-07-18
Data Collection	30 days	Fri 20-07-18	Thu 30-08-18
Analysis and Findings	40 days	Fri 31-08-18	Thu 25-10-18
Analysis of Teachers’ Performance	10 days	Fri 31-08-18	Thu 13-09-18
Analysis of Students’ Performance	5 days	Fri 14-09-18	Thu 20-09-18
Analysis of Generated KPI	5 days	Fri 21-09-18	Thu 27-09-18
Review All Data	5 days	Fri 28-09-18	Thu 04-10-18
Propose Changes to Current Education System	15 days	Fri 05-10-18	Thu 25-10-18

During implementation, two main difficulties may be faced that are as follows.

Lack of Expertise – The existing teachers and faculty members may not have sufficient knowledge on the quality control tools and hence, will not be able to respond to the continuous improvement process. This can be solved by appointing a specific expert on quality control on a short term contract who will analyze the cases, identify KPI and send updated reports to the management team.

Attention of Students – There may be a situation when the students do not pay attention to the classes and do not respond to the quality control process. Furthermore, the extra burden of the curriculum may also turn their attention from studies to something else. This can be solved by allowing sufficient recess times, hosting sports events and developing strict policies regarding the learning process monitoring.

Contact Us

The long term benefits of the improvement plan are as follows.

• The performances of the students will gradually increase and this learning phase will futher aid them in the later parts of their life for professional development.
• With the improvement of the performances of the students, the reputation of the school will also increase resulting in more intakes of students.
• The continuous improvement will also aid in the professional development and experience of the teachers, especially the younger ones.

Conclusion

From the entire report, it is evident that David and his school actually need continuous improvement for ensuring a sustainable future of the school. At the current state of affairs, the performances of the students are constantly decreasing and suitable steps must be taken in order to improve their performances in the class. In addition to the students, the improvement process should also monitor the performances of the teachers as well. It has been seen that at many times, the main reason behind the lack of students’ performance is the improper guidance provided to them by the teachers. Analyzing all the current issues faced and possible solutions, a suitable continuous improvement plan has been suggested and a detailed implementation plan has been presented.

References

Bittremieux, W., Valkenborg, D., Martens, L., & Laukens, K. (2017). Computational quality control tools for mass spectrometry proteomics. Proteomics, 17(3-4).

Cohen-Vogel, L., Cannata, M., Rutledge, S. A., & Socol, A. R. (2016). A Model of Continuous Improvement in High Schools: A Process for Research, Innovation Design, Implementation, and Scale. Teachers College Record, 118(13), n13.

Current, N., Demir, F., Haggerty, K., Naughton, B., & Jahnke, I. (2017). Digital System Design for Strategic Improvement Planning in Education: A Socio-Technical and Iterative Design Approach. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 4(6).

Fullan, M. (2016). The elusive nature of whole system improvement in education. Journal of Educational Change, 17(4), 539-544.

Goetsch, D. L., & Davis, S. B. (2014). Quality management for organizational excellence. Upper Saddle River, NJ: pearson.

Junior, E. S., Feiden, A., Santos, R. F., Siqueira, J., Schmidt, C., & Proença, G. (2017). Statistical and quality control tools applied to the process of wooden furniture production. International Wood Products Journal, 1-5.

Krehbiel, C., Maiersperger, T., Friesz, A., Harriman, L., Quenzer, R., & Impecoven, K. (2016, February). Use Cases for Combining Web Services with ArcPython Tools for Enabling Quality Control of Land Remote Sensing Data Products. In AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts.

Lyhne, I., Cashmore, M., Runhaar, H., & van Laerhoven, F. (2016). Quality control for environmental policy appraisal tools: an empirical investigation of relations between quality, quality control and effectiveness. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 18(1), 121-140.

McLean, M. (2017). Continuous Improvement in Higher Education: A Change Model Using Predictive Analytics to Achieve Organizational Goals.

Mitra, A. (2016). Fundamentals of quality control and improvement. John Wiley & Sons.

Kannan, V., Jhajharia, S., & Verma, S. (2014). Agile vs. waterfall: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research, 3(10), 2680-2686.

Our Success Stories

Kassab, M. (2014, August). An empirical study on the requirements engineering practices for agile software development. In Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), 2014 40th EUROMICRO Conference on(pp. 254-261). IEEE.

Komai, S., Saidi, H., & Nakanishi, H. (2016). Man-Hour Comparison Between Two Methods of Agile and Waterfall in IT System Development. INNOVATION AND MANAGEMENT, 1707.

McInerney, P. (2017). UX in Agile projects: taking stock after 12 years. interactions, 24(2), 58-61.

Siqueira, A. A., Reinehr, S., & Malucelli, A. (2017, September). Using a statistical method to compare agile and waterfall processes performance. In European Conference on Software Process Improvement (pp. 523-532). Springer, Cham.

Chaves, M. S., Araújo, C. D., Teixeira, L., Rosa, D., Júnior, I., & Nogueira, C. (2016). A new approach to managing Lessons Learned in PMBoK process groups: the Ballistic 2.0 Model. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, 4(1), 27-45.

Karaman, E., & Kurt, M. (2015). Comparison of project management methodologies: prince 2 versus PMBOK for it projects. Int. Journal of Applied Sciences and Engineering Research, 4(5), 657-664.

Ohshima, N. (2015). A Study of Concept Structure of PMBOK Based on Graph Theory. Journal on Innovation and Sustainability. RISUS ISSN 2179-3565, 6(1), 69-75.

Richter, W. (2015, April). PMBOK vs. agile methods: How cultural change can become transparent. In Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW), 2015 IEEE Eighth International Conference on (pp. 1-2). IEEE.

Rosa, D., Júnior, I. G., Araújo, C., Nogueira, C. D., Chaves, M. S., & Teixeira, L. R. (2016). A New Approach to Managing Lessons Learned in the PMBoK Process Groups: The Ballistic 2.0 Model. International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management (IJISPM).

Rui, X. U. E., Baron, C., Esteban, P., & Zheng, L. (2016). Integrating the ISO/IEC 15288 Systems Engineering Standard with the PMBoK Project Management Guide to Optimize the Management of Engineering Projects. In Complex Systems Design & Management (pp. 291-291). Springer International Publishing.

Snyder, C. S. (2014). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK (®) Guide. Project Management Institute.

Varajão, J., Colomo-Palacios, R., & Silva, H. (2017). ISO 21500: 2012 and PMBoK 5 processes in information systems project management. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 50, 216-222.

Kannan, V., Jhajharia, S., & Verma, S. (2014). Agile vs. waterfall: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research, 3(10), 2680-2686.

Kassab, M. (2014, August). An empirical study on the requirements engineering practices for agile software development. In Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), 2014 40th EUROMICRO Conference on(pp. 254-261). IEEE.

Komai, S., Saidi, H., & Nakanishi, H. (2016). Man-Hour Comparison Between Two Methods of Agile and Waterfall in IT System Development. INNOVATION AND MANAGEMENT, 1707.

McInerney, P. (2017). UX in Agile projects: taking stock after 12 years. interactions, 24(2), 58-61.

Siqueira, A. A., Reinehr, S., & Malucelli, A. (2017, September). Using a statistical method to compare agile and waterfall processes performance. In European Conference on Software Process Improvement (pp. 523-532). Springer, Cham.