Different Software Development Methodologies: A Complete Guide
- Leanware Editorial Team
- Jun 20
- 9 min read
Choosing the right software development methodology isn’t just a project management decision - it directly affects how efficiently your team works, how fast you ship, and how well the end product aligns with user needs.
Different methodologies exist because different projects demand different structures. Some call for speed and flexibility; others need strict process and documentation.
In this guide, you’ll find an overview of the most widely used software development methodologies, their strengths and trade-offs, and how to choose the one that fits your context best.
TL;DR: Which Methodology Should You Use?
Methodology | Best For | Team Size | Timeline | Complexity |
Waterfall | Regulated industries, fixed requirements | Any | Long | Low-Medium |
Scrum | Evolving products, cross-functional teams | 5-9 people | Medium | Medium |
Kanban | Continuous delivery, support teams | Any | Ongoing | Low |
RAD | MVPs, prototypes | Small | Short | Low-Medium |
RUP | Enterprise systems | Large | Long | High |
Lean | Startups, efficiency-focused | Small-Medium | Medium | Medium |
Quick recommendation: Start with Scrum for most product development, Kanban for operational work, or Waterfall only when compliance demands it.
What Is a Software Development Methodology?

A software development methodology is a structured approach to how teams plan, build, test, and deliver software. It defines the frameworks, processes, and practices used throughout the development lifecycle, guiding how requirements are gathered, how feedback is handled, and how priorities are managed as the project grows.
These approaches help teams answer essential questions, such as:
When should requirements be collected?
How often should testing and feedback occur?
How do you handle change without losing control?
Most methodologies follow core concepts like:
SDLC phases: Planning, design, implementation, testing, and maintenance
Roles: Defined responsibilities across the team
Artifacts: Key deliverables such as specs, user stories, and test plans
Ceremonies: Regular meetings like standups and sprint reviews
Frameworks like Agile (Scrum, Kanban), Waterfall, and RAD apply these in different ways, depending on how much structure or flexibility a project needs.
Formal vs. Ad-Hoc Methodologies: Why Structure Matters
Ad-hoc approaches - where teams work without a defined methodology - often lead to misaligned expectations, lack of accountability, and technical debt. Projects may start fast but get stuck due to unclear responsibilities or unplanned scope changes.
Consider Friendster's downfall in 2003. Without structured practices, their codebase couldn’t scale with user demand, leading to crashes and user churn.
Formal methodologies, on the other hand, bring consistency and predictability. Teams stay aligned, communication is clearer, and risks are easier to manage. Regulated industries like healthcare and aerospace often rely on Waterfall for its structured approach. Companies like Netflix apply formal Agile methods to scale deployments while keeping systems stable.
1. Waterfall Model

The Waterfall model is a linear, sequential approach to software development. Each phase - requirements, design, implementation, testing, and deployment - must be completed before the next one begins.
This model was widely used in traditional software projects and remains common in regulated or high-certainty environments.
Pros:
Detailed documentation and upfront planning.
Predictable scope, timelines, and budgets.
Easier to manage in regulated industries.
Cons:
Inflexible to changing requirements.
Late discovery of issues during testing.
Limited opportunity for early user feedback.
When It Works Best
Waterfall fits well in projects where requirements are stable and thoroughly defined from the start, such as government contracts, legacy system migrations, or healthcare and aerospace systems. It's especially useful when compliance or procurement processes require a fixed scope and documented phases.
2. Agile Methodologies

Agile refers to a group of practices that support iterative development, continuous feedback, and close collaboration. It came about as a response to the limitations of linear models like Waterfall, offering a more adaptive way to build software.
Agile teams work in short cycles (usually 1–3 weeks), releasing small features regularly. Agile values include working software over heavy documentation, collaboration over strict processes, and adapting to change instead of following fixed plans.
Pros:
Adjusts quickly to changing requirements.
Delivers usable features regularly.
Encourages cross-functional teamwork.
Cons:
Scope can expand if not managed.
Needs consistent communication and engagement.
May lack documentation for long-term maintenance.
When It Works Best
Agile is a strong fit for projects with shifting or uncertain requirements, particularly in consumer-facing products where user behavior influences development. It works well for teams that can meet frequently, share feedback, and respond to change without long delays.
Agile is not a single method but a family of frameworks that support adaptive planning, iterative delivery, and rapid response to change. Below are some widely adopted Agile approaches.
2.1 Scrum
Scrum structures work into short, fixed-length sprints (usually 1-4 weeks). It defines three roles:
Product Owner - manages the backlog and represents stakeholders.
Scrum Master - facilitates the process and removes blockers.
Development Team - delivers the work.
Key ceremonies include Sprint Planning, Daily Standups, Sprint Reviews, and Retrospectives. It works best for cross-functional teams building complex products with evolving requirements.
2.2 Kanban
Kanban uses a visual board to track tasks through stages like “To Do,” “In Progress,” and “Done.” It focuses on continuous delivery rather than fixed-length sprints.
Key practices include limiting work-in-progress (WIP), reducing bottlenecks, and optimizing flow.
Kanban is useful for teams with ongoing work, such as operations or maintenance, where tasks vary and priorities shift frequently.
2.3 Feature-Driven Development (FDD)
FDD organizes development around client-valued features. It begins with domain modeling, followed by a structured process: build a feature list, plan by feature, then design and build each feature.
FDD is suitable for large teams and complex domains where a clear architectural model helps manage coordination and delivery.
2.4 Lean Software Development
Lean applies principles from lean manufacturing to software. It focuses on reducing waste, improving flow, and delivering only what’s needed. Key principles include:
Eliminate waste.
Build quality in.
Deliver fast.
Empower the team.
Lean is well-suited for startups and efficiency-driven teams trying to streamline delivery and minimize unnecessary work.
2.5 Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM)
DSDM combines Agile practices with formal structure. It uses timeboxing, MoSCoW prioritization (Must, Should, Could, Won’t), and defined roles to support iterative delivery with clear governance.
The framework is suited for enterprise settings that require stakeholder accountability, documentation, and alignment with organizational standards.
However, DSDM involves upfront planning and training, and may feel heavier than other Agile approaches. It also depends on active user involvement, which can be difficult to sustain across all teams.
2.6 Adaptive Software Development (ASD)
ASD supports iterative cycles of speculation, collaboration, and learning, making it well-suited for projects with high uncertainty or evolving requirements. Instead of rigid planning, teams explore solutions collaboratively and adjust based on what they learn.
This approach works best in innovation-driven environments like R&D, early-stage startups, or emerging tech initiatives where adaptability matters more than predictability.
While ASD encourages flexibility and learning, it offers less structure, which can be challenging for teams that need clear milestones or operate in regulated environments. Success depends on experienced teams and strong communication.
3. Other Iterative Models
While not strictly Agile, the following models share their iterative, feedback-driven approach and are often used in fast-moving or exploratory projects.
3.1 Rapid Application Development (RAD)
RAD is a fast-paced, iterative model that uses early prototyping, parallel development, and ongoing user input to shorten delivery timelines. It relies on visual tools and code reuse to speed up cycles and reduce miscommunication around requirements.
While RAD shares similarities with Agile, like iteration and user feedback, it predates Agile and lacks many of its team practices and delivery discipline. RAD works well for MVPs, internal tools, and time-sensitive projects where short-term functionality matters more than long-term structure.
However, it requires active stakeholder involvement and may lack the documentation needed for complex systems.
3.2 Prototype Model
The Prototype Model involves creating early working models - either throwaway or evolutionary - to validate requirements and design decisions before full development. It helps teams uncover usability issues, clarify ambiguous requirements, and gather concrete feedback through a build–validate–refine cycle.
This approach is especially effective for UI/UX-driven projects or complex systems where traditional specifications fall short.
However, it can lead to unrealistic expectations if stakeholders assume prototypes are production-ready. Too many iterations may delay delivery, and skipping proper engineering practices when moving from prototype to final build can affect quality.
When It Works Best: Best suited for UI-heavy products, dashboards, or systems where user interaction and early validation are essential.
3.3 Rational Unified Process (RUP)
RUP is an iterative development framework created by IBM that combines process discipline with flexibility. It divides projects into four phases - Inception, Elaboration, Construction, and Transition - while supporting ongoing workflows like requirements gathering, design, implementation, and testing throughout the lifecycle.
RUP focuses on risk management, architectural validation, and use-case–driven development, making it effective for maintaining traceability and quality across large systems.
When It Works Best: RUP is a strong fit for large enterprise systems in regulated industries like finance, aerospace, or defense, where extensive documentation, stakeholder coordination, and compliance are required. However, its complexity may be excessive for smaller teams or simpler products.
How to Choose the Right Methodology
No single software development methodology works for every project. The right choice depends on several factors - team experience, complexity, timeline, and stakeholder needs. Here are the main dimensions to consider:
1. Project Size & Complexity
Smaller projects with short timelines and fewer developers often succeed with lighter approaches like Scrum, Kanban, or RAD. These keep overhead low while supporting quick iterations.
For medium-scale efforts, more structure may help - Scrum with defined roles or RAD with quick feedback cycles can maintain coordination without slowing down delivery.
Large or complex systems - those involving multiple teams, long timelines, or regulated environments- usually benefit from structured frameworks like RUP or DSDM that support governance, risk management, and documentation.
Also, consider the technical scope. Projects involving multiple integrations, performance constraints, or advanced architectures may need more planning and coordination regardless of size.
2. Team Structure & Experience
Senior or experienced teams often do well with Agile variants like Lean or ASD, which allow flexibility and decision-making autonomy.
Less experienced or junior teams may need more structure - Waterfall, RUP, or Scrum offer clearer roles, documentation, and milestones.
If teams are distributed across time zones or cultures, approaches that support clear documentation and asynchronous workflows tend to work better than those relying on constant live collaboration.
3. Time-to-Market Requirements
For projects with tight deadlines or competitive pressure, Agile, RAD, or prototyping approaches help accelerate delivery. They support quick feedback and prioritize working software over heavy documentation.
If the project allows for longer timelines, structured approaches like Waterfall or RUP provide thorough planning, which can reduce future rework.
Market dynamics also play a role - fast-changing environments favor adaptive methods, while stable or regulated domains might justify upfront investment in structure.
4. Budget & Stakeholder Involvement
Fixed-budget projects may benefit from Waterfall or DSDM, where scope and timelines are defined early. Agile models often need more flexible budgets since requirements evolve.
If stakeholders can participate regularly and provide feedback, Agile or RAD approaches are a good fit. When stakeholder time is limited, models with formal sign-offs like Waterfall or RUP reduce dependency on constant involvement.
Finally, consider the cost of change - if late changes are expensive, plan-heavy methods work better. If change is cheap or expected, iterative approaches are more efficient.
Quick Comparison Chart
Methodology | Best For | Pros | Cons |
Waterfall | Fixed-scope, regulated projects | Predictable, clear documentation | Inflexible, poor for change |
Agile (Scrum, etc.) | Evolving products with active user feedback | Adaptive, fast delivery | Scope creep, high team discipline |
RAD | MVPs, fast prototyping | Rapid development, feedback loop | Requires constant user input |
Prototype Model | UI/UX-heavy projects | Visual clarity, early validation | May cause iteration fatigue |
DSDM | Enterprise-level agile projects | Structured, user-driven | High planning overhead |
RUP | Large-scale, phased enterprise systems | Scalable, comprehensive | Complex, resource-heavy |
ASD | High-uncertainty, innovation-driven work | Flexible, fast iteration | Hard for junior teams |
Matching Projects to Methodologies
Project Type | Recommended | Why It Fits |
Enterprise ERP System | RUP or DSDM | Structured, coordinated, documentation-heavy. |
Startup MVP | Agile (Scrum), RAD | Fast, flexible, feedback-driven. |
Regulated Finance Application | Waterfall | Stable, phase-based, compliance-ready. |
AI/ML Research Tool | ASD or Lean | Adaptive, iterative, exploratory. |
Customer-Facing Mobile App | Prototype Model + Agile | UX-first, user-tested, fast cycles. |
Maintenance / Support Teams | Kanban | Flexible, visual, continuous delivery. |
Next Steps
No process model works for every product or team. Each has trade-offs. Some give you speed, others give you structure. What matters is picking one that fits how your team works today, not how a textbook says you should build software.
Start small. Pick the simplest process that supports your current stage and team structure. Try it on a real project. Keep what works, drop what doesn’t. Iterate your process just like your product.
You can also consult with our engineers to validate your roadmap, explore delivery options, or assess what team setup fits your stage. Whether you're planning a new build or evolving an existing product, the right approach makes a difference.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a software methodology?
Software methodology is a structured approach that defines how development teams plan, organize, and execute the process of building software applications. It establishes the framework for managing requirements, coordinating team members, ensuring quality, and delivering working software to users.
What are the main software development methodologies?
The main methodologies include Waterfall (sequential phases), Agile variants like Scrum and Kanban (iterative development), RAD (rapid prototyping), RUP (comprehensive iterative framework), and specialized approaches like Lean and ASD. Each methodology addresses different project needs and constraints.
How do process and methodology differ?
Methodology defines the overall approach and philosophy for software development, while process refers to the specific activities, workflows, and procedures used to implement that methodology. For instance, Scrum is a methodology, while daily standups are a process within Scrum.
Can methodologies be blended?
Yes, hybrid approaches often work well in practice. Many teams combine elements from different methodologies - using Scrum for development iterations while maintaining Waterfall's documentation standards for compliance. It’s important that the combined elements don't conflict and that the team understands the resulting approach clearly.