Systems development life cycle

The systems development life cycle (SDLC) describes the typical phases and progression between phases during the development of a computer-based system; from inception to retirement. At base, there is just one life cycle even though there are different ways to describe it; using differing numbers of and names for the phases. The SDLC is analogous to the life cycle of a living organism from its birth to its death. In particular, the SDLC varies by system in much the same way that each living organism has a unique path through its life.[2][3]

The SDLC does not prescribe how engineers should go about their work to move the system through its life cycle. Prescriptive techniques are referred to using various terms such as methodology, model, framework, and formal process.

Other terms are used for the same concept as SDLC including software development life cycle (also SDLC), application development life cycle (ADLC), and system design life cycle (also SDLC). These other terms focus on a different scope of development and are associated with different prescriptive techniques, but are about the same essential life cycle.

The term "life cycle" is often written without a space, as "lifecycle", with the former more popular in the past and in non-engineering contexts. The acronym SDLC was coined when the longer form was more popular and has remained associated with the expansion even though the shorter form is popular in engineering. Also, SDLC is relatively unique as opposed to the TLA SDL, which is highly overloaded.

  1. ^ Image by Mikael Häggström, MD. Reference: Mohapatra, Dr. Hitesh; Rath, Dr. Amiya Kumar (2025-04-24). Fundamentals of Software Engineering. BPB Publications. ISBN 978-93-6589-338-0.
  2. ^ SELECTING A DEVELOPMENT APPROACH. Retrieved 17 July 2014.
  3. ^ Parag C. Pendharkara; James A. Rodgerb; Girish H. Subramanian (November 2008). "An empirical study of the Cobb–Douglas production function properties of software development effort". Information and Software Technology. 50 (12): 1181–1188. doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2007.10.019.