Technical and Organizational Agile Practices: A Latin-American Survey

Paéz, Nicolás; Fontdevila, Diego; Gainey, Fernando; Oliveros, Alejandro

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-91602-6_10

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…• Recognized purpose: both Scrum and TDD present negative values, which is consistent with their industry adoption; Scrum is attractive, popular and simple in appearance, but at the same time hard to perform effectively; TDD is one of the least popular of agile technical practices (Paez et al, 2018) and hard to perform, although it is loved by its practitioners, see User satisfaction rating below.…”

Section: Usability Profiles For Evaluated Processes and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…The conceptual model for the retrospective is that of a meeting (a very common element in the industry landscape for software development), and thus, although its purpose might be unusual for prospective users, its form tends to be very familiar. This might explain the very high rate of usage of retrospectives when compared to other examples in this section (Paez et al, 2018).…”

Section: Metric Definitionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Although Agile and DevOps are very popular sources of processes and practices, real-world teams and organizations struggle to adopt their practices and embrace their mindsets. Many agile transformation initiatives struggle to accomplish their objectives (Dikert et al, 2016) and practice adoption levels are not what might be expected given the popularity of agile methods (Kuhrmann et al, 2019;Paez et al, 2018). This produces negative impact on process improvement initiatives and negatively affects costs and motivation.…”

Section: Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The adoption process first requires learning to perform, and later commitment to perform. Processes and practices that are hard to learn and to perform, for example, formal specifications or Test Driven Development (selected by survey participants as the hardest agile practice to learn (Ambler, 2009)), also show comparatively low adoption rates (Paez et al, 2018).…”

Section: Learnabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• User attractiveness rating: The positive ratings for Continuous Integration and Scrum match their relative popularity (Paez et al, 2018;Version One, 2020). In the case of the VMP, this is readily explained by its visual and participatory aspects.…”

Section: Usability Profiles For Evaluated Processes and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Usability Model for Software Development Processes and Practices

Fontdevila¹

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La usabilidad caracteriza buenas interacciones entre las personas y sus procesos y prácticas. Promueve la satisfacción y crea entornos seguros para la innovación. Los principios de usabilidad como el feedback y la tolerancia a errores están presentes en muchos conceptos de ingeniería de software, como los procesos iterativos y las revisiones de pares. El propósito de la investigación realizada para esta Tesis es traer el concepto de usabilidad de prácticas y procesos a la ingeniería de software. Para lograr este objetivo, y dada la falta de modelos de calidad de procesos enfocados en la usabilidad, un Modelo de Usabilidad de Prácticas y Procesos (UMP) ha sido creado, refinado y evaluado, siguiendo el marco Desing Science Research. UMP ha sido efectivamente aplicado a Scrum, Test Driven Development (TDD), Integración Continua, Behaviour Driven Development (BDD) y el método Visual Milestone Planning (VMP). UMP fue diseñado para ayudar a practicantes, coaches, consultores, docentes e investigadores. Para evaluar UMP se realizaron varios estudios empíricos: una evaluación de expertos inicial para determinar su factibilidad; un focus group para obtener feedback sobre las características y métricas de UMP; dos estudios de confiabilidad, un estudio de acuerdo entre evaluadores sobre Scrum y un estudio de confiabilidad entre evaluadores sobre TDD-BDD; y dos estudios para evaluar la utilidad de UMP, un estudio de caso sobre la aplicación de UMP al método VMP, y un cuasi-experimento de campo en el cual un equipo de desarrollo en la industria aplicó UMP para mejorar su práctica de BDD. Los resultados de los estudios de utilidad muestran que los usuarios consideran a UMP útil, y 37 evaluaciones independientes por expertos fueron realizadas sobre procesos y prácticas del mundo real. Las contribuciones de esta tesis incluyen: UMP con sus características y métricas, el proceso de evaluación de UMP, el conocimiento creado sobre la confiabilidad y utilidad de UMP a través de los estudios empíricos, y los perfiles que caracterizan la usabilidad de prácticas y procesos de amplio uso actual en la industria como Scrum, Integración Continua, TDD y BDD, obtenidos a través de la aplicación de UMP.

show abstract

Section: Usability Profiles For Evaluated Processes and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: Metric Definitionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Learnabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Usability Profiles For Evaluated Processes and Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Usability Model for Software Development Processes and Practices

Fontdevila¹

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluating the Utility of the Usability Model for Software Development Process and Practice

Fontdevila

Genero

Oliveros

et al. 2019

Product-Focused Software Process Improvement

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

show abstract