Abstract
Many companies that change their development process to agile later adapt these methods to their specific needs, take a step back to traditional processes, or do not continue their agile initiative. Particularly in light of the huge diversity of domains from information systems to embedded systems, it is necessary to find the right degree of agility for each context. Our goal is to describe how agility can be integrated into rich processes. Bringing the advantages of these two organizational worlds together should result in a useful, pragmatic, and feasible solution. This integration can be performed using two different approaches: revolutionary and evolutionary. In the revolutionary approach, an agile method is introduced to replace the current development process. In the evolutionary approach, the existing process is enhanced with appropriate and beneficial agile aspects. Both of these approaches have advantages for specific domains or contexts. After comparing the two approaches and related implementations of the revolutionary approach, this chapter focuses on the integration of agile practices, a specific evolutionary approach, due to the lack of existing research. With our comparison on the basis of the advantages and disadvantages of these two integration approaches, their detailed description, and some related implementations, we provide a foundation for further investigation in the field of combining agile and rich processes to find the right degree of agility.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abrahamsson, P., Warsta, J., Siponen, M.T., Ronkainen, J.: New directions on agile methods: a comparative analysis. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 244–254. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2003)
Agile Alliance Inc.: Guide to agile practices. http://guide.agilealliance.org (2013)
Appelo, J.: The big list of agile practices. http://noop.nl/2009/04/the-big-list-of-agile-practices.html (2009)
Armbrust, O., Rombach, D.: The right process for each context: objective evidence needed. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and Systems Process, pp. 237–241. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2011)
Automotive SIG: Automotive SPICE process assessment model. In: The Procurement Forum (2010)
Balaji, S., Murugaiyan, M.S.: Waterfall vs. V-Model vs. Agile: a comparative study on SDLC. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Bus. Manage. 2(1), 26–30 (2012)
Baskerville, R., Pries-Heje, J.: Racing the E-Bomb: how the internet is redefining information systems development methodology. In: Proceedings of the IFIP TC8/WG8.2 Working Conference on Realigning Research and Practice in Information Systems Development: The Social and Organizational Perspective, pp. 49–68. Kluwer, B.V., Deventer, The Netherlands (2001)
Beck, K., Andres, C.: Extreme Programming Explained, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2004)
Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R., Kern, J., Marick, B., Martin, R.C., Mellor, S., Schwaber, K., Sutherland, J., Thomas, D.: Manifesto for agile software development. http://www.agilemanifesto.org (2001). Accessed 29 May 2007
Benefield, G.: Rolling out agile in a large enterprise. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 461–461. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2008)
Bleek, W.G., Wolf, H.: Agile Softwareentwicklung – Werte, Konzepte und Methoden. dpunkt.verlag (2008)
Boehm, B.: A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Comput. 21(5), 61–72 (1988)
Boehm, B., Turner, R.: Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (2003)
Chow, T., Cao, D.B.: A survey study of critical success factors in agile software projects. J. Syst. Softw. 81(6), 961–971 (2008)
Chung, M.W., Drummond, B.: Agile at Yahoo! from the trenches. In: Proceedings of the Agile Conference, pp. 113–118. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2009)
Chung, M.W., Nugroho, S., Unson, J.: Tidal wave: the games transformation. In: Proceedings of the Agile Conference, pp. 102–105. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2008)
CMMI Product Team: CMMI for development, version 1.3. Technical report, CMU/SEI-2010-TR-033, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. http://resources.sei.cmu.edu/library/asset-view.cfm?AssetID=9661 (2010)
Conboy, K.: Agility from first principles: reconstructing the concept of agility in information systems development. Inf. Syst. Res. 20(3), 329–354 (2009)
Diebold, P., Dahlem, M.: Agile practices in practice: a mapping study. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, pp. 30:1–30:10. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2014)
Diebold, P., Zehler, T.: The agile practices impact model – idea, concept, and application scenario. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Processes, pp. 92–96. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2015)
Diebold, P., Taibi, D., Lampasona, C.: Moonlighting scrum: an agile method for distributed teams with part-time developers working during non-overlapping hours. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering and Advances, pp. 318–323. IARIA XPS Press (2013)
Diebold, P., Ostberg, J.P., Wagner, S., Zendler, U.: What do practitioners vary in using Scrum? Agile Processes, in Software Engineering, and Extreme Programming. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 212, pp. 40–51. Springer International Publishing (2015)
Garcia-Borgonon, L., Barcelona, M., Garcia-Garcia, J., Alba, M., Escalona, M.: Software process modeling languages: a systematic literature review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 56(2), 103–116 (2014)
Graaf, B., Lormans, M., Toetenel, H.: Embedded software engineering: the state of the practice. IEEE Softw. 20(6), 61–69 (2003)
Heymann, J., Kampfmann, R.: SAP’s road to agile software development. In: Future Business Software. Progress in IS, pp. 111–116. Springer International Publishing (2014)
Humphrey, W.S.: The personal software process. Technical report CMU/SEI-2000-TR-022, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA (2000)
Humphrey, W.S.: The team software process. Technical report. CMU/SEI-2000-TR-023, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA (2000)
IEEE: IEEE standard glossary of software engineering terminology. IEEE Standard 610.12-1990, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (1990)
ISO/TC 210: Medical device software – software life cycle processes. International Standard IEC 62304:2006, International Organization for Standardization (2006)
JTC 1/SC 7: Systems and software engineering – software life cycle processes. International Standard ISO/IEC 12207:2008, International Organization for Standardization (2008)
JTC 1 SC 7: Information technology – process assessment – part 5: an exemplar software life cycle process assessment model. International Standard ISO/IEC 15504-5:2012, International Organization for Standardization (2012)
Maurer, F., Melnik, G.: Agile methods: moving towards the mainstream of the software industry. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 1057–1058. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2006)
McHugh, M., Cawley, O., McCaffcry, F., Richardson, I., Wang, X.: An agile v-model for medical device software development to overcome the challenges with plan-driven software development lifecycles. In: International Workshop on Software Engineering in Health Care, pp. 12–19. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2013)
Nerur, S., Mahapatra, R., Mangalaraj, G.: Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies. Commun. ACM 48(5), 72–78 (2005)
OMG: Software & Systems Process Engineering Metamodel Specification (SPEM). Omg standard, Object Management Group (2008)
OMG: Unified Modeling Language (UML) ver 2.4.1. Omg standard, Object Management Group (2011)
Osterweil, L.: Software processes are software too. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 2–13. IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, USA (1987)
Paetsch, F., Eberlein, A., Maurer, F.: Requirements engineering and agile software development. In: Proceedings of the International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises, pp. 308–313. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2003)
Ramesh, B., Cao, L., Mohan, K., Xu, P.: Can distributed software development be agile? Commun. ACM 49(10), 41–46 (2006)
Scacchi, W.: Process Models in Software Engineering, pp. 993–1005. Wiley, New York (2002)
Smits, H., Pshigoda, G.: Implementing scrum in a distributed software development organization. In: Proceedings of the Agile Conference, pp. 371–375. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2007)
Sureshchandra, K., Shrinivasavadhani, J.: Adopting agile in distributed development. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Global Software Engineering, pp. 217–221. IEEE, Washington, DC, USA (2008)
Sutherland, J., Schwaber, K.: The scrum guide. The definitive guide to scrum: The rules of the game. Scrum.org-October (2013)
TC 22/SC 32: Road vehicles – functional safety. International Standard ISO 26262:2011, International Organization for Standardization (2011)
Turk, D., France, R., Rumpe, B.: Limitations of agile software processes. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on eXtreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering, pp. 43–46. Springer (2002)
V-Modell XT Team: V-Modell XT. National standard, Federal Ministery of the Interior, Germany, Berlin (2013)
Version One Inc.: 9th annual state of agile survey. https://www.versionone.com (2015)
Williams, L., Cockburn, A.: Agile software development: it’s about feedback and change. IEEE Comput. 36(6), 39–43 (2003)
Williams, L., Kessler, R., Cunningham, W., Jeffries, R.: Strengthening the case for pair programming. IEEE Softw. 17(4), 19–25 (2000)
Acknowledgments
First of all, we would like to thank to Sofia Vidal for her support and help during the development and piloting of the Agile Practices List and Schema. In addition, we would like to thank Sonnhild Namingha and Jens Heidrich for their valuable comments and feedback. This research was conducted partly in the context of a Software Campus project funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF grant no. 01IS12053).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Diebold, P., Zehler, T. (2016). The Right Degree of Agility in Rich Processes. In: Kuhrmann, M., Münch, J., Richardson, I., Rausch, A., Zhang, H. (eds) Managing Software Process Evolution. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31545-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31545-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31543-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31545-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)