Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement

PROFES 2019: Product-Focused Software Process Improvement pp 661–671Cite as

Comparison of Agile Maturity Models

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11915))

Abstract

Context: Agile software development is widely used by small teams. Companies want to check their implementation of Agile for different reasons. Many Agile Maturity Models (AMM) exist that support practitioners in assessing and improving their agility. However, practitioners need to be able to make informed decisions on which one to use. Objective: The aim of this work is to enable the comparison of existing AMMs. Method: We identified 14 AMMs in a non-systematic literature review, considering non-scientific sources as well. We propose criteria for their comparison based on our experience and our understanding of practitioners’ needs. Results: We present twelve comparison criteria and show how the identified AMMs differ along those criteria. Conclusion: Practitioners get an overview of existing models and can select a suitable one with the help of the comparison criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Version One: 12th Annual State of Agile TM Report (2018). https://www.versionone.com/

  2. Diebold, P., Ostberg, J.-P., Wagner, S., Zendler, U.: What do practitioners vary in using scrum? In: Lassenius, C., Dingsøyr, T., Paasivaara, M. (eds.) XP 2015. LNBIP, vol. 212, pp. 40–51. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18612-2_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Kuhrmann, M., et al.: Hybrid software and system development in practice: waterfall, scrum, and beyond. In: Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Software and System Process, pp. 30–39 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Software Engineering Institute: CMMI for Development, Version 1.3 – Improving processes for developing better products and services (2010). http://www.sei.cmu.edu

  5. Schweigert, T., Nevalainen, R., Vohwinkel, D., Korsaa, M., Biro, M.: Agile maturity model: oxymoron or the next level of understanding. In: Mas, A., Mesquida, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2012. CCIS, vol. 290, pp. 289–294. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30439-2_34

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Schweigert, T., Vohwinkel, D., Korsaa, M., Nevalainen, R., Biro, M.: Agile maturity model: a synopsis as a first step to synthesis. In: McCaffery, F., O’Connor, R.V., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2013. CCIS, vol. 364, pp. 214–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39179-8_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Ozcan-Top, O., Demirörs, O.: Assessment of agile maturity models: a multiple case study. In: Woronowicz, T., Rout, T., O’Connor, Rory V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2013. CCIS, vol. 349, pp. 130–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38833-0_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Leppänen, M.: A comparative analysis of agile maturity models. In: Pooley, R., Coady, J., Schneider, C., Linger, H., Barry, C., Lang, M. (eds.) Information Systems Development, pp. 329–343. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4951-5_27

  9. Kitchenham, B.A., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical report EBSE-2007-01, School of Computer Science and Mathematics, Keele University (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wohlin, C.: Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2014), no. 38 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Diebold, P., Küpper, S., Zehler, T.: Nachhaltige Agile Transition: Symbiose von technischer und kultureller Agilität. In: Engstler, M., et al. (Hrsg.) Projektmanagement und Vorgehensmodelle, pp. 121–126 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wells, D.: Extreme Programming: A Gentle Introduction (2013). http://www.extremeprogramming.org/

  13. Sutherland, J., Schwaber, K.: The Scrum Guide (2016). http://www.scrumguides.org

  14. Beck, K., et al.: Manifesto for Agile Software Development (2001). http://agilemanifesto.org/

  15. Branger, R.: A Maturity Model for Agile BI (2015). https://rbranger.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/a-maturity-model-for-agile-bi_en_v1_1.pdf

  16. Patel, C., Ramachandran, M.: Agile maturity model (AMM): a software process improvement framework for agile software development practices. Int. J. Softw. Eng. 2(1), 1–26 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Towards an Agile Process Maturity Model (2008). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/2a99/3ed7c2ab66700f54f19809a7617c7b9949fc.pdf

  18. Benefield, R.: Seven dimensions of agile maturity in the global enterprise: a case study. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Yin, A., Figueiredo, S., Da Silva, M.M.: Scrum maturity model. In: The Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Minick, E., Fredrick, J.: Enterprise Continuous Integration Maturity Model (2014). https://developer.ibm.com/urbancode/docs/continuous-delivery-maturity-model/

  21. Proulx, M.: Yet Another Agile Maturity Model (AMM) – The 5 Levels of Maturity (2010). https://danossia.wordpress.com/2010/07/12/yet-another-agile-maturity-model-the-5-levels-of-maturity/

  22. Sidky, A., Arthur, J., Bohner, S.: A disciplined approach to adopting agile practices: the agile adoption framework. Innov. Syst. Softw. Eng. 3(3), 203–216 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Humble, J., Russel, R.: The agile maturity model – applied to building and releasing software (2011). ThoughtWorks STUDIOS. https://info.thoughtworks.com/rs/thoughtworks2/images/agile_maturity_model.pdf

  24. Seuffert, M.: Agile Karlskrona Test (2009). https://mayberg.se/media/downloads/karlskrona-test.pdf

  25. Ronen-Harel, S.: ATMM - Agile Testing Maturity Model: Practical View (2010). https://de.slideshare.net/AgileSparks/atmm-practical-view

  26. Woods, D.: An Agile BI Maturity Model (2011). https://www.forbes.com/sites/danwoods/2011/10/26/an-agile-bi-maturity-model/#5bb8247b5960

  27. Druckman, A.: Agile Transformation Strategy (2011). Whitepaper. https://www.collab.net/

  28. Programmedevelopment: Agile Readiness & Maturity. Programmedevelopment.com/agile-readiness-maturity.htm (website not available anymore)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) as part of a Software Campus project (01IS17047). We also thank Sonnhild Namingha for proof reading this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Fraunhofer IESE, Fraunhofer-Platz 1, 67663, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Anna Schmitt & Sven Theobald

  2. Bagilstein GmbH, Mainz, Germany

    Philipp Diebold

Authors
  1. Anna Schmitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sven Theobald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Philipp Diebold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sven Theobald .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

    Xavier Franch

  2. University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland

    Tomi Männistö

  3. Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Silverio Martínez-Fernández

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Schmitt, A., Theobald, S., Diebold, P. (2019). Comparison of Agile Maturity Models. In: Franch, X., Männistö, T., Martínez-Fernández, S. (eds) Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11915. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35333-9_52

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35333-9_52

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-35332-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-35333-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation