The Views of Experts on the Current State of Agile Method Tailoring

Abstract

AbstrdCtAs

Software quality assurance in Scrum: The need for concrete guidance on SQA strategies in meeting user expectations

“…This study corroborates the notion that the software development community has generally accepted that no one method is comprehensive enough to provide exact fit for all types of information systems development projects (Conboy & Fitzgerald, 2007). In addition to methods being incomplete, a 1998 study by Firtzgerald (as cited in, Conboy & Fitzgerald, 2007) uncovered that rigorous use of methods in practice is limited with a reported 6 per cent of developers 'religiously' adhering to methods. It is therefore advisable to organisations who are new to Scrum or wishing to implement Scrum to be aware of the incompleteness of the method.…”

“…In light of the weaknesses in method engineering and contingency factors approaches, the researcher sought literature grounded on real world case studies from organisations that have successfully implemented method tailoring as described in Fitzgerald et al (2003) Conboy and Fitzgerald (2007) and Fitzgerald et al (2006). The method tailoring approaches reported in these literature accounts involved establishing and using an overarching method at a macrolevel for all projects and then customising the method at a micro-level to suit the needs of individual projects.…”

A Scrumban integrated gamification approach to guide software process improvement: a Turkish case study

“…Most importantly, tasks shown in a Kanban task-board are assigned by using a pull mechanism that limits the work in process [10], and ultimately the production is constrained with the notion called minimum marketable functions [11]. In addition, an increasing number of software organizations recognize that customizing an agile methodology regarding company needs is vitally important [12].…”

“…creation and discussion of too many user stories [19]. Such an approach is necessary for software projects that have ambiguous user stories, and further helps to cope with software projects with frequent programming defects [12]. To deal with problematic issues better, Scrumban requires a good visible representation (see Fig.…”

Thoughts on Current and Future Research on Agile and Lean: Ensuring Relevance and Rigor

“…During that time, there has been significant adoption of agile principles and methods in organizations and teams. However, research into the use of agile methods has found that, although teams widely claim to use agile methods, actual use of agile practices is rather low, even in teams led by high-profile agile proponents [11]. Further, while research into the effects of the use of agile methods has found impacts such as a reduction in bugs [25] and higher job satisfaction on agile teams [36], many studies on agile have not measured the use of the agile actual methods or practices, and have often failed to argue theoretically why agile is theoretically different from other project environments, or identified the core of what organizational, customer, project, and team characteristics are necessary in order to apply agile development principles and practices successfully.…”