Extending Agile Methods: Postmortem Reviews as Extended Feedback

Dingsøyr, Torgeir; Hanssen, Geir Kjetil

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-40052-3_2

Cited by 35 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 5 shows that the average effort is 3.4% in Project 1, 4.7% in Project 2 and 4.8% in Project 3. The proposed XScrum model demonstrates its effectiveness for Projects 1 to 3 by accomplishing the post-mortem analysis within the speculated time as recommended in existing XP for small projects [36][37]. Another indication of increase in quality of the proposed XScrum is presented because the effort in Project 1 is 3.4% that is fewer than 4.7% of the prescribed effort of existing XP for small projects.…”

Section: Validationmentioning

confidence: 86%

Evaluating the Quality of Proposed Agile XScrum Model

Qureshi¹

2017

IJMECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The software companies are practicing XP and Scrum models from last several years. XP lacks in management practices whereas Scrum is weak in engineering practices. Due to continually promising need of agile development, this research tackles the problems of XP and Scrum by integrating them to enrich the strengths of XP and Scrum and suppress their limitations. The previous attempts provide little effective empirical evidence regarding the integration of XP and Scrum. Therefore, there is a pressing need to provide empirical evidence for the integration of XP and Scrum to show its usefulness developing the software projects. The same is accomplished by proposing XScrum model. Another goal of this paper is to analyze the quality of proposed XScrum with existing XP and Scrum. The proposed XScrum is validated by performing three case studies for three industrial projects and the results are described in the paper. The results are presented using quantitative and qualitative data. The results provide empirical evidence that there is a significant improvement in quality of proposed XScrum as compared to the existing XP and Scrum.

show abstract

Section: Validationmentioning

confidence: 86%

Evaluating the Quality of Proposed Agile XScrum Model

Qureshi¹

2017

IJMECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are several recommendations for embedding reflective practice within standard agile practices as it is related to team performance improvement [7][8][9]. Cockburn [8] introduced a reflection workshop which involves collecting issues and generating tasks and decisions.…”

Section: Agile Retrospective Meetingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Much of the existing research focuses on the techniques of performing retrospective meetings and provides lesser detail about the reflection process involved [5][6][7][8][9]. The Reflective Agile Learning Model (REALM) [7] classified reflection in ASD practices into reflection-in-action or reflection that occurs during a practice, and reflection-onaction or reflection that occurs post a practice based on definitions of the same by Argyris and Schön [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reflection in Agile Retrospectives

Andriyani

Hoda

Amor

2017

Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.A retrospective is a standard agile meeting practice designed for agile software teams to reflect and tune their process. Despite its integral importance, we know little about what aspects are focused upon during retrospectives and how reflection occurs in this practice. We conducted Case Study research involving data collected from interviews of sixteen software practitioners from four agile teams and observations of their retrospective meetings. We found that the important aspects focused on during the retrospective meeting include identifying and discussing obstacles, discussing feelings, analyzing previous action points, identifying background reasons, identifying future action points and generating a plan. Reflection occurs when the agile teams embody these aspects within three levels of reflection: reporting and responding, relating and reasoning, and reconstructing. Critically, we show that agile teams may not achieve all levels of reflection simply by performing retrospective meetings. One of the key contributions of our work is to present a reflection framework for agile retrospective meetings that explains and embeds three levels of reflection within the five steps of a standard agile retrospective. Agile teams can use this framework to achieve better focus and higher levels of reflection in their retrospective meetings.

show abstract

“…Agile practices are set to improve communication and knowledge sharing in software contexts. For example, postmortem reviews encourage team members to share and learn from good and bad project experiences (Dingsøyr & Hanssen, 2003). Another example is pair programming that helps foster sharing of embedded knowledge (Bellini et al, 2005.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risks to Effective Knowledge Sharing in Agile Software Teams: A Model for Assessing and Mitigating Risks

Ghobadi

Mathiassen

2016

Information Systems Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present an empirically-grounded and theoretically-informed model for the assessment and mitigation of risks to effective knowledge sharing in agile development. The model is anchored in empirical insights from four agile projects across two software companies and in extant research on risk-strategy analysis and knowledge sharing in software development. We develop the model as part of the long-standing tradition of presenting risk management models dedicated to specific issues in software development and confirm its practical usefulness in one of the software companies studied. The model offers concepts and processes to assess a project's knowledge sharing risk profile and articulate an overall resolution strategy plan to mitigate the risks. The results highlight how different knowledge sharing risk management profiles can lead to different project performance outcomes. We conclude with a discussion of research opportunities that the results offer software development scholarship.

show abstract

Extending Agile Methods: Postmortem Reviews as Extended Feedback

Cited by 35 publications

References 9 publications

Evaluating the Quality of Proposed Agile XScrum Model

Evaluating the Quality of Proposed Agile XScrum Model

Reflection in Agile Retrospectives

Risks to Effective Knowledge Sharing in Agile Software Teams: A Model for Assessing and Mitigating Risks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About