Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Agile Manifesto and Practices Selection for Tailoring Software Development: A Systematic Literature Review

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 11271))

Abstract

Agile methods have been largely used for many years to provide developers with a flexible software development process leading to software quality improvement. To get the best results and eliminate unnecessary efforts, the development team should select the most appropriate methods and techniques. The fundamental core of an agile method has to be well-understood before deciding which parts of the method need to be adopted. We believe that the quickest way to do so is to understand the prescripts of the Agile Manifesto. Many researches have proposed different tailoring approaches based on the relation and straight-forward interpretation between each agile practice and agile values or principles. We however have observed that agile practitioners do not dedicate the necessary attention to the Agile Manifesto before adopting agile methods or practices and directly use them. It is because the importance of Agile Manifesto in tailoring context is not obvious enough to the community. This study aims at doing a systematic literature review on the existing case studies, to verify the relation between the Agile Manifesto and agile practice selection.

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

Access this chapter

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

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Problems were extracted from 12 papers that described the problems they encountered which led them to tailored agile adoption.

  2. 2.

    Expectations were extracted from 27 papers that discussed the team’s expectations.

  3. 3.

    Benefits were extracted from 37 papers that discussed the benefits of tailored agile methods adoption.

References

  1. Abbas, N., Gravell, A.M., Wills, G.B.: Using factor analysis to generate clusters of agile practices (a guide for agile process improvement). In: AGILE Conference, pp. 11–20. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abrahamsson, P., Salo, O., Ronkainen, J., Warsta, J.: Agile software development methods: review and analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.08439 (2017)

  3. Ahmed, E.M., Sidky, A.: 25 percent ahead of schedule and just at “step 2” of the sami. In: Agile Conference, AGILE 2009, pp. 162–169. IEEE (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ambler, S.: The Agile Unified Process (AUP). Ambysoft (2005). http://www.agilealliance.hu/materials/books/SWA-AUP.pdf

  5. Auvinen, J., Back, R., Heidenberg, J., Hirkman, P., Milovanov, L.: Software process improvement with agile practices in a large telecom company. In: Münch, J., Vierimaa, M. (eds.) PROFES 2006. LNCS, vol. 4034, pp. 79–93. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/11767718_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Ayed, H., Vanderose, B., Habra, N.: A metamodel-based approach for customizing and assessing agile methods. In: Quality of Information and Communications Technology (QUATIC), pp. 66–74. IEEE (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bass, J.M.: Scrum master activities: process tailoring in large enterprise projects. In: 2014 IEEE 9th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE), pp. 6–15. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Beck, K., et al.: Manifesto for agile software development (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bowers, J., May, J., Melander, E., Baarman, M., Ayoob, A.: Tailoring XP for large system mission critical software development. In: Wells, D., Williams, L. (eds.) XP/Agile Universe 2002. LNCS, vol. 2418, pp. 100–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45672-4_10

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Campanelli, A.S., Parreiras, F.S.: Agile methods tailoring-a systematic literature review. J. Syst. Softw. 110, 85–100 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cohen, D., Lindvall, M., Costa, P.: An introduction to agile methods. Adv. Comput. 62(03), 1–66 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Derbier, G.: Agile development in the old economy. In: Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference, ADC 2003, pp. 125–131. IEEE (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Erickson, J., Lyytinen, K., Siau, K.: Agile modeling, agile software development, and extreme programming: the state of research. J. Database Manage. 16(4), 88 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Esfahani, H.C., Cabot, J., Yu, E.: Adopting agile methods: can goal-oriented social modeling help? In: 2010 Fourth International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), pp. 223–234. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Esfahani, H.C., Eric, S., Annosi, M.C.: Towards the strategic analysis of agile practices. In: CAiSE Forum, pp. 155–162 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fitzgerald, B., Russo, N., O’Kane, T.: An empirical study of system development method tailoring in practice. In: ECIS 2000 Proceedings, p. 4 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hummel, M.: State-of-the-art: a systematic literature review on agile information systems development. In: 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 4712–4721. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Jalali, S., Wohlin, C.: Global software engineering and agile practices: a systematic review. J. Softw. Evol. Process 24(6), 643–659 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kitchenham, B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kitchenham, B.: Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele Univ. 33(2004), 1–26 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O.P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., Linkman, S.: Systematic literature reviews in software engineering-a systematic literature review. Inform. Softw. Technol. 51(1), 7–15 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kiv, S., Heng, S., Kolp, M., Wautelet, Y.: An intentional perspective on partial agile adoption. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Software Technologies - Volume 1: ICSOFT, pp. 116–127. INSTICC, SciTePress (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kiv, S., Heng, S., Wautelet, Y., Kolp, M.: Towards a goal-oriented framework for partial agile adoption. In: Cabello, E., Cardoso, J., Maciaszek, L.A., van Sinderen, M. (eds.) ICSOFT 2017. CCIS, vol. 868, pp. 69–90. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93641-3_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Kurapati, N., Manyam, V.S.C., Petersen, K.: Agile software development practice adoption survey. In: Wohlin, C. (ed.) XP 2012. LNBIP, vol. 111, pp. 16–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30350-0_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee, S., Yong, H.S.: Agile software development framework in a small project environment. J. Inform. Process. Syst. 9(1), 69–88 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lin, J., Yu, H., Shen, Z., Miao, C.: Using goal net to model user stories in agile software development. In: 2014 15th IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing (SNPD), pp. 1–6. IEEE (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Madi, T., Dahalin, Z., Baharom, F.: Content analysis on agile values: a perception from software practitioners. In: 2011 5th Malaysian Conference on Software Engineering (MySEC), pp. 423–428. IEEE (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mikulėnas, G., Butleris, R., Nemuraitė, L.: An approach for the metamodel of the framework for a partial agile method adaptation. Inform. Technol. Control 40(1), 71–82 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Qumer, A., Henderson-Sellers, B.: A framework to support the evaluation, adoption and improvement of agile methods in practice. J. Syst. Softw. 81(11), 1899–1919 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Schön, E.M., Thomaschewski, J., Escalona, M.J.: Agile requirements engineering: a systematic literature review. Comput. Stan. Interfaces 49, 79–91 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schwaber, K.: Agile Project Management with Scrum. Microsoft Press, Redmond Wash (2004)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Séguin, N., Tremblay, G., Bagane, H.: Agile principles as software engineering principles: an analysis. In: Wohlin, C. (ed.) XP 2012. LNBIP, vol. 111, pp. 1–15. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30350-0_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Shen, Z., Miao, C., Tao, X., Gay, R.: Goal oriented modeling for intelligent software agents. In: Proceedings. IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, (IAT 2004), pp. 540–543. IEEE (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Shu, X., Turinsky, A., Sensen, C., Maurer, F.: A case study of the implementation of agile methods in a bioinformatics project. In: Concas, G., Damiani, E., Scotto, M., Succi, G. (eds.) XP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4536, pp. 169–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-73101-6_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Thomas, D.: Agile is dead (2014). https://pragdave.me/blog/2014/03/04/time-to-kill-agile.html

  36. VersionOne: 11th annual state of agile development survey (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wautelet, Y., Heng, S., Kiv, S., Kolp, M.: User-story driven development of multi-agent systems: a process fragment for agile methods. Comput. Lang. Syst. Struct. 50, 159–176 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cl.2017.06.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wautelet, Y., Heng, S., Kolp, M., Mirbel, I.: Unifying and extending user story models. In: Jarke, M., et al. (eds.) CAiSE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8484, pp. 211–225. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07881-6_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Authors would like to thank Benjamin Croix for his involvement in the Systematic Literature Review, i.e., the papers selection process and data extraction.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. LouRIM-CEMIS, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-La-Neuve, Belgium

    Soreangsey Kiv & Manuel Kolp

  2. HEC Liège, Université de Liège, Liège, Belgium

    Samedi Heng

  3. KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Yves Wautelet

Authors
  1. Soreangsey Kiv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samedi Heng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manuel Kolp
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yves Wautelet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Soreangsey Kiv , Samedi Heng , Manuel Kolp or Yves Wautelet .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Technische Universität Clausthal, Goslar, Germany

    Marco Kuhrmann

  2. Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany

    Kurt Schneider

  3. University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia

    Dietmar Pfahl

  4. Okayama Prefectural University, Okayama, Japan

    Sousuke Amasaki

  5. QAware GmbH, Munich, Germany

    Marcus Ciolkowski

  6. Chalmers | University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden

    Regina Hebig

  7. IT University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Paolo Tell

  8. Leibniz University Hannover, Hannover, Germany

    Jil Klünder

  9. Clausthal University of Technology, Goslar, Germany

    Steffen Küpper

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Kiv, S., Heng, S., Kolp, M., Wautelet, Y. (2018). Agile Manifesto and Practices Selection for Tailoring Software Development: A Systematic Literature Review. In: Kuhrmann, M., et al. Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11271. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03673-7_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03673-7_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-03672-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-03673-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation