The first step in the process of includes clear understanding of the necessities, as well as of the system, the software is to run for. Once the needs and system are understood, creative decisions are taken in order to meet the specific requirements and preferences of the customer as quickly as possible. The goal of custom software development is to build a solution not for the mass users, but as a unique option to be used by a single customer/user or a group.

While customized software development comprises a well thought-after, stage by stage process, every small step is taken with account of all possible hidden dangers and nuances involved with it. Along with addressing customer’s preferences, custom developed software often incorporates most progressive technology of the time.

Customized software is usually available to all related users/owners of a certain application and remains to be a source to address/meet a common cause. If we take the case of software designed for a cell phone manufacturer, the software would be a ‘custom’ solution to issues related to the cell phone and can be available to thousands of its individual users.

Development companies spread worldwide provide custom programming and software engineering services. While most of the companies vouch for wide experience in custom database programming, ones interested to develop specialized software from any such outlets should check validity of their claim beforehand.

And the best way to a reality check is to have a glance over the portfolio of the company. While a global outreach and technology expertise would prove points in favor of a company’s skill in accomplishing goals of global players, client’s testimonial on the grounds of timely delivery of the application would shed light on the ability of the company to deliver product on time. Of course, there is no harm in opting for a company that has a specialized service provision capability; there are companies with competency to offer many a solution under one roof. These companies with their exposure to web applications development are often found to be efficient in inculcating best of the web with off-line applications.

Now, off-line or online application; specialist or multi-tasking – the choice is yours that needs to be made with an objective. And the objective should be to own a customized software that fulfills each of your varied necessity …with least glitches.

In our experience, agile and iterative methodologies are more reliable and lower risk than using more traditional ‘waterfall’ style methods for software development. We have also found that various Agile software methods such as eXtreme Programming (XP), Scrum, Unified Process (UP) and Evo supply important and useful paradigms for reliable delivery of software development projects.

We believe that one potential weakness of these methods is the reliance on regular ongoing testing between iterations to ensure software quality, without providing specific processes or tools to define or facilitate this testing. We have successfully utilised the Six Sigma problem solving methodology DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve and Control) within each iteration to improve the reliability of the software development process. The key to the success of this methodology is its focus on using data-driven tools to identify what is to be changed and then to monitor the actual impact of changes in a feedback loop.

Most software project failures are the result of business needs not being correctly understood or by overly optimistic software development estimates. These errors lead to long delays and large cost overruns. The traditional mechanism for ensuring that requirements are understood and that estimates are accurate is to engage in lengthy up-front analysis, design and planning. Unfortunately this approach is inflexible and is inappropriate for the majority of real-world projects. Agile methods use an iterative approach to ensure that flexibility is an inherent component of the project however this can lead to a lack of clarity as to whether the deliverable is tracking to goal. By applying Six Sigma concepts of defining, quantifying and measuring key delivery factors we can monitor overall delivery and quality of the resulting software without resorting to “analysis paralysis” in the early stages.

The specific parameters to be measured and analysed will be project dependent and should relate directly to the ultimate end-user functionality of the software being developed. In addition, we have found that some useful key indicators for software quality include measurements of numbers of defects found in a test cycle, the percentage of rework per iteration (the number of requirements which need to be re-implemented during one cycle) and the number of new features which are logged after one cycle.

We believe that Six Sigma provides a framework and effective tools that support reliable Agile software development project delivery. Based on our experience, we strongly recommend combining Six Sigma with Agile and Iterative software development methodologies.

As an American, I believe there is mostly a negative conatation towards the trend of large American companies offshoring jobs. You know, the underlying tone is somthing similar to “big companies only care about profits, not people”. Honestly, when the topic is big business, I can agree with points on both sides of the discussions. But, what is often lost in these discussions of offshoring software development jobs are the opportunities it creates for small business.

I’m living proof that small business opportunity lies in being able to win local clients and then clearly articulate and manage the project to offshore developers. For me, more time needs to be spent thinking on strategic level concepts and ideas rather than fulfilling tactical level operations. I did not realize this overnight and it has taken me years to accept.

As a software developer, my industry is in a state of flux. Is offshoring software development a good thing or a bad thing? The jury is still out and the discussions are usually quite lively. Over the years, I’ve heard the following snippets in the discussions “quality vs. cost”, “you get what you pay for”, “we tried offshoring software development once and now we spend all day fixing offshore developers code”, “we saved a boatload of money by offshoring certain tactical aspects of software development”, etc. In my experience, these points have more merit in big company circumstances compared to small business.

Clients for website development expect to pay lower fees than they did in the 90s regardless of their company size. As a small business owner, I’m unable to maintain a sustainable profit margin with lower client fees. What can I do? Simple. Hire offshore developers at lower rates, so my profit margin allows the projects to be worthwhile. The opportunity for me is to spend more time on clearly defining technical architecture, project management and communicating regularly with developers and clients rather than writing code.

Win-win-win: Client wins, my company wins, offshore software developers win. But, when there is a winner, there usually is a looser? The looser in software development landscape shift is the small business that refuses to adapt to global competition or utilize these global resources. Or the individual software developer who refuse to adapt to lower rates and more pressure and competition to innovate. And no, building walls around ourselves and the industry is not the answer. If we try create global software development competition barriers, we are creating a path towards lose-lose-lose.