I'm currently working in a small software R&D startup, the technical department of which consists of me, my supervisor, who we'll call Bob, and a DevOps engineer. I've been with the company for about half a year, and in the past few months began to notice that due to the lack of things common to the industry, which didn't seem as evident during the 3-month probation period. We have not moved closer to a working product due to Bob's design philosophy, which consists of little planning, lots of coding, little re-planning, lots of re-coding.
My attempts to steer the approach towards building the application "properly", by using an existing methodology, or, at least, a philosophy different to the one I've described above, have been met with no particular enthusiasm, bicycles are being engineered for tasks that do not require them, and the overall process is quite hurt. To add to it, the company's current software infrastructure, is managed by Bob and it actually works to a degree.
I have mostly made up my mind (possibly incorrectly) about the very low possibility of success for such a thing (I've worked in one startup before this, and the approach was very different, despite the same 2-programmer setup), and am preparing to quit. However, I've managed to build a good relationship with the CEO, and am not impartial to the state of his funds and his idea.
My question, as it stands, is this: Is there anything I can do to perhaps salvage the process here instead of cutting my losses?
Considering the length of Bob's stay at the company, I think the CEO is more inclined to trust his ways than the industry standards, as they've been working for the previous projects. Do note, the scale of these projects is far smaller than the current one.