Eagle: a team practices audit framework for agile software development

Guerrero, Antonio; Fresno–Aranda, Rafael; Ju, An; Fox, Armando; Fernández, Pablo; Müller, Carlos; Ruiz–Cortés, Antonio

doi:10.1145/3338906.3341181

Cited by 5 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another study related to auditing agile projects was done by Gibbons [20], who created a framework to audit the agile teams focused on the XP environment. The framework monitors agile teams on adherence to agile practices during solution development and backlog delivery.…”

Section: H Agile Project Auditingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The assessment of specific papers on auditing agile project found that the first published papers were in year 2013 [25], [35]. Other publications found in year 2018 [34] and 2019 [3], [14], [20], [36], [41]. A total of eight papers were published on auditing agile projects from 2013 to 2019.…”

Section: Phase 2: Extensive Reading and Categorizing Of The Selected mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Phase 6: Synthesis, resynthesis and making it all make sense This phase aimed at synthesizing the identified concepts and drawing conclusion. Agile project management has to be adhered to agile values and guiding principles [19], [20]. Project governance monitors agile project progress throughout its implementation and provides a framework for decision making.…”

Section: Figure 2 Integration Of Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Product vision audit: Audit processes which can be used to audit agile projects are examine the created product vision [9], establish a steering committee, identify stakeholders, develop epics (user stories) and user story acceptance criteria and train the Scrum team and stakeholders on agile values and guiding principles [6], [14], [18], [20], [25], [33]. • Product backlog audit: The audit processes examine developed product requirements, minutes of the meeting where product requirements were reviewed and approved and train the Scrum master, Scrum team and stakeholders on product requirements [9], [14], [20], [25], [34]. • Release backlog audit: The audit processes examine the plan and schedule for multiple sprints and the minutes of the meeting where the length of the iterations was determined and release plans that were reviewed and approved [9], [25].…”

Section: Figure 3 Conceptual Framework For Auditing Agile Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Conceptual Framework for Auditing Agile Projects

Mkoba

Marnewick

2020

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most organizations use IT projects as vehicles to implement the IT strategy which contributes to achieving organizational strategic objectives and goals. Agile project management has been a potential solution to deliver successful IT projects instead of the traditional waterfall approach. This potential has resulted in organizations adopting agile project management to deliver IT projects on time and realise benefits. However, auditors especially those whose experience lies with more traditional and system development life cycle controls are struggling with how to audit agile projects. The problem addressed in this article is lack of an audit framework for auditing agile projects to ensure IT project success. The purpose of this article is to present the proposed conceptual framework for auditing agile projects that are implemented using Scrum methodology. The framework introduces audit processes in each process of the Scrum methodology. The quantitative research method used online survey questionnaire to validate the conceptual framework amongst IT professionals in South Africa. The data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0. The research revealed that there was a significant correlation between the identified audit processes and agile project success. This research emphasizes on the need to take into account auditing agile project from its initiation to closure. This article contributes to the body of knowledge with regard to project auditing. Auditors can use the proposed framework to audit agile projects which are implemented using Scrum methodology to ensure successful completion of IT projects.

show abstract

Section: H Agile Project Auditingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phase 2: Extensive Reading and Categorizing Of The Selected mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figure 2 Integration Of Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Figure 3 Conceptual Framework For Auditing Agile Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Conceptual Framework for Auditing Agile Projects

Mkoba

Marnewick

2020

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Gave students access to a new metrics dashboard that was different from the one used previously. We made this change migrating the dashboard to a new platform [12]. The new dashboard presented a similar set of metrics about Backlog, CI, and TDD as the previous one.…”

Section: Case Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

What Agile Processes Should We Use in Software Engineering Course Projects?

Hemani

Dimitriadis

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While project-based software engineering courses aim to provide learning opportunities grounded in professional processes, it is not always possible to replicate every process in classrooms due to course constraints. Previous studies observed how students react to various processes and gave retroactive recommendations. In this study, we instead combine a field study on professional Agile (eXtreme Programming, XP) teams and an established team process taxonomy to proactively select team processes to incorporate in a project-based software engineering course. With collected knowledge from the field study, we choose three XP processes to augment the design of a mature software engineering project course. We choose processes that are 1) considered important by professionals, and 2) complete with respect to coverage of the taxonomy's main categories. We then compare the augmented course design with the original design in a case study. Our results suggest that 1) even without extra resources, adding these new processes does not interfere with learning opportunities for XP processes previously existing in the course design; 2) student teams experience similar benefits from these new processes as professional teams do, and students appreciate the usefulness and value of the processes. In other words, our approach allows instructors to make conscious choices of XP processes that improve student learning outcomes while exposing students to a more complete set of processes and thus preparing them better for professional careers. Course designers with limited resources are encouraged to use our methodology to evaluate and improve the designs of their own project-based courses.

show abstract