Advertisement

Agile Process Improvement: Diagnosis and Planning to Improve Teamwork

  • Mats Angermo Ringstad
  • Torgeir Dingsøyr
  • Nils Brede Moe
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 172)

Abstract

Agile software development addresses software process improvement within teams. Process improvement, although a central concept in agile development, is still hard to achieve. This paper argues for the use of diagnosis and action planning to improve teamwork in agile software development. Diagnosis and action planning is illustrated in a small and immature team and in a large and more mature team. The action planning focused on improving shared leadership, team orientation and learning. The improvement project provided most new insight for the mature team.

Keywords

software process improvement teamwork agile software development 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aaen, I., Arent, J., Mathiassen, L., Ngwenyama, O.: A Conceptual MAP of Software Process Improvement. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 13, 81–101 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lycett, M., Macredie, R.D., Patel, C., Paul, R.J.: Migrating agile methods to standardized development practice. Computer 36, 79–85 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dybå, T., Dingsøyr, T.: Empirical Studies of Agile Software Development: A Systematic Review. Information and Software Technology 50, 833–859 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nerur, S., Balijepally, V.: Theoretical Reflections on Agile Development Methodologies. Communications of the ACM 50, 79–83 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salo, O., Abrahamsson, P.: An iterative improvement process for agile software development. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 12, 81–100 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baskerville, R., Wood-Harper, A.T.: A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. Journal of Information Technology 11, 235–246 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nerur, S., Mahapatra, R., Mangalaraj, G.: Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies. Communications of the ACM 48, 72–78 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Okhuysen, G.A., Bechky, B.A.: Coordination in Organizations: An Integrative Perspective. Academy of Management Annals 3, 463–502 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Trist, E.: The evolution of socio-technical systems: a conceptual framework and an action research program, Ontario Quality of Working Life Centre, Toronto, Ontario (1981)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kirkman, B.L., Rosen, B.: Beyond self-management: Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Academy of Management Journal 42, 58–74 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morgan, G.: Images of Organizations. SAGE publications, Thousand Oaks (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pearce, C.L.: The future of leadership: Combining vertical and shared leadership to transform knowledge work. Academy of Management Executive 18, 47–57 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hewitt, B., Walz, D.: Using Shared Leadership to Foster Knowledge Sharing in Information Systems Development Projects. In: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on HICSS 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hoegl, M., Parboteeah, P.: Autonomy and teamwork in innovative projects. Human Resource Management 45, 67 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Emery, F., Thorsrud, E.: Democracy at work: the report of the Norwegian industrial democracy program. Martinus Nijhoff Social Sciences Division, Leiden (1976)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Basili, V.R.: Software development: a paradigm for the future. Presented at Computer Software and Applications Conference, COMPSAC 1989 (1989)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    SEI, Capability Maturity Model ® Integration (CMMI) (2002) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hansen, B., Rose, J., Tjørnehøj, G.: Prescription, description, reflection: the shape of the software process improvement field. International Journal of Information Management 24, 457–472 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Humphrey, W.S.: Managing the software process. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1989)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hansen, B., Rose, J., Tjornehoj, G.: Prescription, description, reflection: the shape of the software process improvement field. International Journal of Information Management 24, 457–472 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aaen, I.: Essence: Facilitating Agile Innovation. In: XP 2008, pp. 1–10. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dingsøyr, T.: Postmortem reviews: Purpose and Approaches in Software Engineering. Information and Software Technology 47, 293–303 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Aaen, I., Börjesson, A., Mathiassen, L.: Navigating Software Process Improvement Projects. In: Baskerville, R., Mathiassen, L., Pries-Heje, J., DeGross, J. (eds.) Business Agility and Information Technology Diffusion. IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, vol. 180, pp. 53–71. Springer, Boston (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Qumer, A., Henderson-Sellers, B.: A framework to support the evaluation, adoption and improvement of agile methods in practice. Journal of Systems and Software 81, 1899–1919 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moe, N.B., Dingsøyr, T., Røyrvik, E.: Putting Agile Teamwork to the Test – A Preliminary Instrument for Empirically Assessing and Improving Agile Software Development. Presented at XP 2009, Pula, Italy (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mats Angermo Ringstad
    • 1
  • Torgeir Dingsøyr
    • 2
    • 3
  • Nils Brede Moe
    • 2
  1. 1.Acando ASOsloNorway
  2. 2.SINTEFTrondheimNorway
  3. 3.Dept. of Computer and Information ScienceNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations