Abstract
What This Chapter Is About
-
We explain the important ideas in SafeScrum ® —separation of concern and the relevant parts of the V-model.
-
We present the overall SafeScrum ® process—Scrum plus the needed add-ons.
-
First we discuss important issues such as prioritizing activities, issues related to the development of safety-critical software.
-
Then we discuss issues related to safety culture, IEC 61508:2010 information items and how to prepare for SafeScrum®.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
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
The Business Dictionary. 2017 [cited 2017]; Available from: http://www.businessdictionary.com/
Bentley, C. (2010). Prince2: A practical handbook. New York: Routledge.
Bjerke-Gulstuen, K., Larsen, E.W., Stålhane, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2015) High level test driven development – Shift left. In C. Lassenius, T. Dingsøyr, & M. Paasivaara (Eds.), Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming: 16th International Conference, XP 2015, Helsinki, Finland, May 25–29, 2015, Proceedings. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 239–247, 978-3-319-18612-2.
Bukowski, J. V. & Chastain-Knight, D. (2016) Assessing safety culture via the site safety index (TM). In Proceedings of AIChE 12th Global Congress on Process Safety. Houston, TX: Exida.
Cooper, R. G. (2011). Winning at new products: Creating value through innovation. New York: Basic Books.
Daniels, J. (2003). Modelling in an agile world. Fastnloose ltd, p. 15, http://docplayer.net
Friedrichsen, U. (2016). Resilience reloaded – More resilience patterns. slideshare.com
Grote, G., & Künzler, C. (2000). Diagnosis of safety culture in safety management audits. Safety Science, 34(1), 131–150.
Henry, S., & Kafura, D. (1981). Software structure metrics based on information flow. IEEE transactions on Software Engineering, 5, 510–518.
Kazman, R., Klein, M., & Clements, P. (2001). Evaluating software architectures-methods and case studies. Boston: Addison-Wesley.
Laukkarinen, T., Kuusinen, K., & Mikkonen, T. (2018). Regulated software meets DevOps. Information and Software Technology, 97, 176–178.
McCabe, T. J. (1976). A complexity measure. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 4, 308–320.
Moe, N. B., Aurum, A., & Dybå, T. (2012). Challenges of shared decision-making: A multiple case study of agile software development. Information and Software Technology, 54(8), 853–865.
Needle, D. (2010). Business in context: An introduction to business and its environment. Andover: Cengage Learning EMEA.
Pender, T. (2003). UML bible. New York: Wiley.
Shannon. (2014). 4 Reasons Why UML is Agile (or Could Be), in GenMyModel.
Sommer, A. F., Hedegaard, C., Dukovska-Popovska, I., & Steger-Jensen, K. (2015). Improved product development performance through agile/stage-gate hybrids: The next-generation stage-gate process? Research Technology Management, 58(1), 34–44.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hanssen, G.K., Stålhane, T., Myklebust, T. (2018). Placing Agile in a Safety Context. In: SafeScrum® – Agile Development of Safety-Critical Software . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99334-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99334-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99333-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99334-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)