I consider the ADDIE model as a framework for the whole project. The model is a guideline for creating a decent learning solution that meets your business goal.

However, in order to make a learning program, the course itself, I prefer to use Backward design. It is an excellent way to define objectives before developing the course.

If you utilize some other models that are perfectly fine. I think that all of them have some wisdom. More important is to choose what is best for your particular project.

I think the instructional designer (ID) can support his/her opinion with data or research if needed. Maybe until he will gain enough credibility.

Also, I like to explain my role and clarify my authority as an ID at the beginning of the project. In a perfect world, I would call it cooperation. In the real world, we will negotiate and comprise.

Moreover, I do think that sometimes SMEs may have this sense (foresight?) about their course even though they are not experts on andragogy. The main goal is to establish a good trustworthy relationship.

As Dr. Luke Hobson stated in his book, ID is a glue. I truly deeply believe that the best ideas can become a good product only with the contribution of all the members of the team.

However, I am fully capable to work alone and develop learning initiatives end-to-end.

Usually, before starting the process of creating I try to find out the full scale of the company's tech possibilities. According to the collected data, I suggest the ideas.

I don't think there is the best learning tool out there, but I know that we can find the perfect one for your project.

Believe me, there are very few situations in the world of the learning solutions such as "enough time", "enough resources", and "enough data".

So, my way to conduct the needs analysis is by collecting as much information as possible using all sorts of methods. Implement a Design thinking interview if you have only a few stockholders. Surveys, focus groups, the "Map it" approach, and many more