Balancing Agility and Discipline in a Medical Device Software Organisation

  • Martin McHugh
  • Fergal McCaffery
  • Brian Fitzgerald
  • Klaas-Jan Stol
  • Valentine Casey
  • Garret Coady
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 349)


Agile development techniques are becoming increasingly popular in the generic software development industry as they appear to offer solutions to the problems associated with following a plan-driven Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). However, agile methods may not be suited to all industries or organisations. For agile methods to succeed, an organisation must be structured in a way to accommodate agile methods. Medical device software development organisations are bound by regulatory constraints and as a result face challenges when they try to completely follow an agile methodology, but can reap significant benefits by combining both agile and plan-driven SDLC such as the Waterfall or V-Model. This paper presents an analysis of a medical device software development organisation based in Ireland, which is considering moving to agile software development techniques. This includes the performing of a Home-Ground Analysis to determine how agile or disciplined the organisation currently is. Upon completion of the Home-Ground Analysis recommendations were made to the organisation as to how they could tailor their existing structure to better accommodate agile development techniques. These recommendations include adopting agile practices such as self-organising teams to promote a culture of “chaos” within the organisation.


Agile Medical V-Model Home-Ground Analysis 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Jones, P.L., Jorgens, J., Taylor Jr., A.R., Weber, M.: Risk Management in the Design of Medical Device Software Systems. Biomedical Instrumentation & Technology 36, 237–266 (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Conboy, K., Fitzgerald, B.: Method and developer characteristics for effective agile method tailoring: A study of XP expert opinion. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 20, 1–30 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Laanti, M., Salo, O., Abrahamsson, P.: Agile methods rapidly replacing traditional methods at Nokia: A survey of opinions on agile transformation. Information and Software Technology 53, 276–290 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cawley, O., Wang, X., Richardson, I.: Lean/Agile Software Development Methodologies in Regulated Environments – State of the Art. In: Abrahamsson, P., Oza, N. (eds.) LESS 2010. LNBIP, vol. 65, pp. 31–36. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McHugh, M., McCaffery, F., Casey, V.: Barriers to Adopting Agile Practices When Developing Medical Device Software. In: Mas, A., Mesquida, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2012. CCIS, vol. 290, pp. 141–147. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vogel, D.: Agile Methods: Most are not ready for prime time in medical device software design and development, DesignFax Online (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McHugh, M., McCaffery, F., Casey, V.: Barriers to using Agile Software Development Practices within the Medical Device Industry. In: European Systems and Software Process Improvement and Innovation Conference, EuroSPI, Vienna Austria (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boehm, B., Turner, R.: Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed. Addison-Wesley (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    FDA, General Principles of Software Validation: Final Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff. Centre for Devices and Radiological Health (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    FDA, General Controls for Medical Devices. Food and Drug Administration (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jo, H.H., Parsaei, H.R., Sullivan, W.G.: Principles of Concurrent Engineering. In: Parsaei, H.R. (ed.) Concurrent Engineering: Contemporary Issues and Modern Design Tools. Springer, Germany (1993)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    AAMI, ANSI/AAMI/IEC 62304, Medical device Software - Software life cycle processes. Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    McCaffery, F., McFall, D., Donnelly, P., Wilkie, F.G.: Risk Management Process Improvement for the medical device industry. Presented at the Conference on Software Development, SWDC-REK 2005, Iceland (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Royce, W.: Managing the Development of Large Software Systems. Presented at the Proceedings of IEEE WESCON (1970)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rook, P.E.: Controlling software projects. IEEE Software Engineering Journal 1, 7 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pfleeger, S.L., Atlee, J.M.: Software Engineering: Theory and Practice. Pearson Higher Education, New Jersey (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Casey, V., McCaffery, F.: Med-Trace: Traceability Assessment Method for Medical Device Software Development. Presented at the European Systems & Software Process Improvement and Innovation Conference (EuroSPI), Roskilde, Denmark (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cadle, J., Yeates, D.: Project Management for Information Systems. Pearson Education (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Munassar, N.M.A., Govardhan, A.: A Comparison Between Five Models of Software Engineering. IJCSI International Journal of Computer Science Issues 7, 94–101 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rottier, P.A., Rodrigues, V.: Agile Development in a Medical Device Company. Presented at the Proceedings of the 11th AGILE Conference, AGILE 2008, Girona, Spain (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rasmussen, R., Hughes, T., Jenks, J.R., Skach, J.: Adopting Agile in an FDA Regulated Environment. Presented at the Agile Conference, AGILE 2009, Chicago, IL (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weyrauch, K.: What Are We Arguing About? A Framework for Defining Agile in our Organization. Presented at the Proceedings of the Conference on AGILE 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    AAMI, AAMI TIR45:2012 – Guidance on the use of agile practices in the development of medical device software (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boehm, B., Turner, R.: Rebalancing Your Organization’s Agility and Discipline. In: Maurer, F., Wells, D. (eds.) XP/Agile Universe 2003. LNCS, vol. 2753, pp. 1–8. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cockburn, A.: Agile Software Development. Addison-Wesley, Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Klens-Bigman, D.: Layers of Shu-Ha-Ri in the Practice of IaidoGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Highsmith, J.: Agile software development ecosystems. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., Boston (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mehrfard, H., Hamou-Lhadj, A.: The Impact of Regulatory Compliance on Agile Software Processes with a Focus on the FDA Guidelines for Medical Device Software. International Journal of Information System Modeling and Design 2, 67–81 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Turk, D., France, R.: Assumptions Underlying Agile Software Development Processes. Journal of Database Management 16, 62–87 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin McHugh
    • 1
  • Fergal McCaffery
    • 1
  • Brian Fitzgerald
    • 2
  • Klaas-Jan Stol
    • 2
  • Valentine Casey
    • 1
  • Garret Coady
    • 3
  1. 1.Regulated Software Research Group, Department of Computing and MathematicsDundalk Institute of Technology & LeroIreland
  2. 2.Lero – The Irish Software Engineering Research CentreUniversity of LimerickIreland
  3. 3.BlueBridge TechnologiesDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations