oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Strategies to Introduce Agile Practices: Comparing Agile Maturity Models with Practitioners’ Experience
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering, Karlskrona, Sweden.
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0639-4234
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering, Karlskrona, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7368-4448
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Faculty of Computing, Department of Software Engineering, Karlskrona, Sweden. (CERIS)ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0311-1502
2019 (English)In: Journal of Empirical Software Engineering, ISSN 1382-3256, E-ISSN 1573-7616Article in journal (Refereed) Submitted
Abstract [en]

Context: Agile maturity models (AMMs) have been proposed to provide guidance for adopting Agile practices. Evaluations of AMMs indicatethat they might not be suitable for industry use. One issue is that AMMs have mainly been evaluated against pre-defined sets of criteria, instead of industry practice.

Objectives: The objectives of this study are to: (1) compare current AMMs regarding their guidance for Agile adoption, (2) investigate the strategies for Agile adoption used by practitioners, and (3) investigate similarities and differences between (1) and (2).

Methods: We conducted a literature survey that included grey literature to identify strategies proposed by the AMMs. We also conducted a survey and 11 interviews to identify the strategies used by practitioners to introduce Agile practices. This study combines quantitative and qualitative analysis.

Results: From the literature survey we found 26 AMMs, whereof 12 provide explicit mappings of Agile practices to maturity levels. These mappings showed little agreement in when practices should be introduced. Based on 40 survey responses we identified three high-level strategies for introducing Agile practices: big-bang, incremental, and complex strategies. The survey andinterviews revealed that the guidance suggested by AMMs are not aligned well with industry practice and that Agile practices might already be in place before an organization starts a transition to Agile.

Conclusion: In their current form, AMMs do not provide sufficient information to guide Agile adoption in industry. Our results suggest that there might be no universal strategy for Agile adoption that works better than others.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2019.
National Category
Software Engineering
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-72583OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-72583DiVA, id: diva2:1292115
Available from: 2019-02-27 Created: 2019-02-27 Last updated: 2019-02-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Authority records BETA

Nurdiani, IndiraBörstler, JürgenFricker, Samuel

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nurdiani, IndiraBörstler, JürgenFricker, SamuelChatzipetrou, Panagiota
In the same journal
Journal of Empirical Software Engineering
Software Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 88 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf