Wahdini Wahdini, Hilyah Magdalena

Comparative Evaluation of Feature-Driven Development and Scrum in Public Facility Booking Systems

Introduction

Comparative evaluation of feature-driven development and scrum in public facility booking systems. Quantitative comparison of Feature-Driven Development (FDD) and Scrum for public facility booking systems. FDD yielded fewer errors, higher usability & 63% faster borrowing process.

Abstract

The Parittiga Sub-District Office still relies on manual procedures for multipurpose building borrowing, resulting in limited schedule transparency, double booking vulnerabilities, and delayed confirmations. However, a critical research gap exists: no quantitative comparison between Feature-Driven Development (FDD) and Scrum has been conducted for public facility booking systems. To address this, a web-based booking system was developed using FDD and empirically compared with Scrum through a comparative experimental design. Using identical two-developer teams, both methods were evaluated across five metrics: development time per feature, functional error rate (black-box testing), developer understanding (1-5 scale), usability (SUS), and end-to-end borrowing efficiency. Findings demonstrate that FDD outperforms Scrum with 50% fewer functional errors (2 vs 4), higher developer understanding (4.3 vs 3.8), and better usability (84.2 - Excellent vs 71.6 - Good), despite requiring 2 additional hours per feature (12 vs 10). Moreover, the FDD-based system accelerates the complete borrowing process by 63% (4 vs 11 minutes). This research contributes empirical evidence to the agile methodology literature and offers a structured, replicable evaluation framework for practitioners selecting development methods for stable, documentation-intensive public service environments.

Review

The paper "Comparative Evaluation of Feature-Driven Development and Scrum in Public Facility Booking Systems" addresses a critical gap in the literature by providing a quantitative comparison of Feature-Driven Development (FDD) and Scrum within the under-researched domain of public facility booking systems. Recognizing the inherent inefficiencies and vulnerabilities of manual processes in such environments, the authors present a compelling case for selecting appropriate agile methodologies. Their research contributes robust empirical evidence to the agile development discourse, particularly concerning stable, documentation-intensive public service contexts, offering valuable insights for practitioners and researchers alike. The study employs a robust comparative experimental design, utilizing identical two-developer teams to evaluate both FDD and Scrum across a well-defined set of five metrics, including development time per feature, functional error rates, developer understanding, usability (SUS), and end-to-end process efficiency. The findings demonstrate FDD's superior performance in key quality indicators. Specifically, FDD yielded 50% fewer functional errors, fostered higher developer understanding among developers, and resulted in a system with excellent usability (SUS score of 84.2), significantly outperforming Scrum in these critical aspects. Furthermore, the FDD-based system dramatically improved the overall borrowing process efficiency, accelerating it by 63%, which represents a substantial practical benefit for public service delivery. While FDD did require slightly more development time per feature (12 hours vs. Scrum's 10), this trade-off appears well-justified by the significant gains in system quality, user experience, and operational efficiency demonstrated. The research provides a valuable, replicable evaluation framework for practitioners, though the generalizability of findings from a two-developer team and a specific sub-district office context could be further explored in future work. Nevertheless, this study successfully addresses a significant research gap, offering clear, data-driven recommendations for organizations navigating methodology selection in public sector IT projects where reliability, usability, and documentation are paramount. Its contribution to both agile theory and practice is commendable.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.