A framework for modeling structural association among De‐Motivators of scaling agile

Abstract

Usage of agile methods for software development has increased in recent times.Rapid delivery of software products is ensured by these methods with less expense and high user gratification. Application of these methods on a large scale causes many De-Motivators or challenges as initially these methods were aimed at those developmental teams that worked on small scale. However, no effort has been made yet to hand out the various correlations among the challenges. To fill the space, the Interpretive Structural Model (ISM) approach is used to reconnoiter the correlations among the De-Motivators regarding Scaling Agile Software Development Methodologies (ASDM) from the management perspective. Creation of a framework for structural modeling association among the De-Motivators is the aim of this study. To attain the goal, a hybrid methodology was applied based on a Systematic literature review (SLR), empirical survey, and ISM. First, we pointed out 15 De-Motivators of Scaling ASDM from management perspectives through SLR study. Second, with the help of 59 experts from different countries, a questionnaire survey was conducted to empirically examine the correlations among the detected De-Motivators. Further, correlations among the challenges are discovered with the usage of ISM through review of the panel, and they accomplish the categorization through CrossImpact Matrix Multiplication Applied Approach.

Scaled agile framework. Dealing with software process‐related challenges of a financial group with the action research approach

“…As a matter of fact, Abrar et al came out with a categorization of as many as 15 demotivators for such processes from the management perspective. 15 Furthermore, numerous challenges for large-scale agile development have been identified and classified in systematic literature reviews. 13,[16][17][18] Hence, the call of Paasivaara and Lassenius to investigate diverse settings for scaling frameworks and to come up with practically applicable and field-tested recommendations 19 and solutions remains valid.…”

“…One must bear in mind, though, that successful implementation of any of the aforementioned frameworks is not an easy undertaking. As a matter of fact, Abrar et al came out with a categorization of as many as 15 demotivators for such processes from the management perspective 15 . Furthermore, numerous challenges for large‐scale agile development have been identified and classified in systematic literature reviews 13,16–18 .…”

Large Scaling Agile in an Organization: Theoretical Foundations and Research Directions

“…В целом переход на Agile признается успешным, однако процесс трансформации сопровождается возникновением немалого количества проблем в организациях (Sarangee et al, 2022;Strode et al, 2022;Santos, Carvalho, 2022;Abrar et al, 2021;Alsaqaf et al, 2019). При этом при переходе на следующий этап они вынуждены решать новые проблемы и тем самым постоянно совершенствовать способы управления.…”

Scaling scrum with a customized nexus framework: A report from a joint industry‐academia research project

“…As a matter of fact, Abrar et al listed as many as fifteen de-motivators for scaling agile effectively. 36 Companies strive for completing the transformation process too fast, their employees are reluctant to change, issues with assuring quality emerge, and legacy non-agile organizational artifacts prove to be hard to integrate. 18 Organizations leave training out of transformation's scope, maintain as-usual workloads despite the transformation process itself temporarily yielding new workflows, and keep a number of old commitments that under the new reality should be discontinued.…”

“…That said, transformation‐related issues are highly diverse. As a matter of fact, Abrar et al listed as many as fifteen de‐motivators for scaling agile effectively 36 . Companies strive for completing the transformation process too fast, their employees are reluctant to change, issues with assuring quality emerge, and legacy non‐agile organizational artifacts prove to be hard to integrate 18 .…”