[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
research-article

Scaling agile in large organizations: : Practices, challenges, and success factors

Published: 17 October 2018 Publication History

Abstract

Context: Agile software development has nowadays reached wide adoption. However, moving agile to large‐scale contexts is a complex task with many challenges involved. Objective: In this paper, we review practices, challenges, and success factors for scaling agile both from literature and within a large software company, identifying the most critical factors. Method: We conduct a focused literature review to map the importance of scaling practices, challenges, and success factors. The outcome of this focused literature review is used to guide action research within a software company with a view to scaling agile processes. Results: Company culture, prior agile and lean experience, management support, and value unification were found to be key success factors during the action research process. Resistance to change, an overly aggressive roll‐out time frame, quality assurance concerns, and integration into preexisting nonagile business processes were found to be the critical challenges in the scaling process. Conclusion: The action research process allowed to cross‐fertilize ideas from literature to the company's context. Scaling agile within an organization does not need to follow a specific scheme, rather the process can be tailored to the needs while keeping the core values and principles of agile methodologies.

Graphical Abstract

We investigate practices, challenges, and success factors for scaling agile software development. We follow a 2‐step process: a literature review used as input for an action research process within a company scaling‐up the development process. Culture within the company and prior agile and lean experience, management support, unification of views, and values were key success factors, while resistance to change, too quick roll‐out, quality assurance issues, and integration with previous non‐agile parts of the organization were critical challenges

References

[1]
Eklund U, Berger C. Scaling agile development in mechatronic organizations: a comparative case study. In: Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice Track. IEEE Press; 2017; Buenos Aires, Argentina:173‐182.
[2]
Fitzgerald B, Stol K‐J, O'Sullivan R, O'Brien D. Scaling agile methods to regulated environments: an industry case study. In: 2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE; 2013; San Francisco, CA, USA:863‐872.
[3]
Boehm B, Turner R. Management challenges to implementing agile processes in traditional development organizations. IEEE Software. 2005;22:30‐39.
[4]
Rolland KH. Scaling across knowledge boundaries: a case study of a large‐scale agile software development project. In: Proceedings of the Scientific Workshop Proceedings of XP2016, Vol. 5. ACM; 2016; Edinburgh, Scotland.
[5]
Carlile PR. A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organ Sci. 2002;13:442‐455.
[6]
Carlile PR. Transferring, translating, and transforming: an integrative framework for managing knowledge across boundaries. Organ Sci. 2004;15:555‐568.
[7]
Dyba T, Dingsoyr T. What do we know about agile software development?. IEEE Software. 2009;26:6‐9.
[8]
Ambler SW. Scaling agile software development through lean governance. In: ICSE Workshop on Software Development Governance, 2009. SDG'09. IEEE; 2009; Washington, DC, USA:1‐2.
[9]
Ebert C, Paasivaara M. Scaling agile. IEEE Software. 2017;34:98‐103.
[10]
Paasivaara M. Adopting SAFe to scale agile in a globally distributed organization. In: 2017 IEEE 12th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE). IEEE; 2017:36‐40.
[11]
Kasauli R, Liebel G, Knauss E, Gopakumar S, Kanagwa B. Requirements engineering challenges in large‐scale agile system development. In: Requirements Engineering Conference (RE), 2017 IEEE 25th International. IEEE; 2017; Lisbon, Portugal:352‐361.
[12]
Mishra D, Mishra A. Complex software project development: agile methods adoption. J Softw Maint Evol Res Pract. 2011;23:549‐564.
[13]
Heikkila V, Rautiainen K, Jansen S. A revelatory case study on scaling agile release planning. In: 2010 36th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA). IEEE; 2010; Lille, France:289‐296.
[14]
Power K. A model for understanding when scaling agile is appropriate in large organizations. In: International Conference on Agile Software Development. Springer; 2014:83‐92.
[15]
Saddington P. Scaling agile product ownership through team alignment and optimization: a story of epic proportions. In: Agile Conference (AGILE), 2012. IEEE; 2012:123‐130.
[16]
Moore E, Spens J. Scaling agile: finding your agile tribe. In: Agile 2008 Conference; 2008; Toronto:121‐124.
[17]
Conboy K, Coyle S, Wang X, Pikkarainen M. People over process: key challenges in agile development. IEEE Software. 2011;28:48‐57.
[18]
Dingsøyr T, Moe Nils B, Fægri TE, Seim EA. Exploring software development at the very large‐scale: a revelatory case study and research agenda for agile method adaptation. Empir Softw Eng. 2017;23:1‐31.
[19]
Paasivaara M, Lassenius C. Challenges and success factors for large‐scale agile transformations: a research proposal and a pilot study. In: Proceedings of the Scientific Workshop Proceedings of XP2016, Vol. 9. ACM; 2016; Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
[20]
Chow T, Cao D‐B. A survey study of critical success factors in agile software projects. J Syst Softw. 2008;81:961‐971.
[21]
Rossi B, Russo B, Succi G. Open source software and open data standards as a form of technology adoption: a case study. In: IFIP International Conference on Open Source Systems. Springer; 2007:325‐330.
[22]
Rossi B, Russo B, Succi G. Adoption of free/libre open source software in public organizations: factors of impact. Inf Technol People. 2012;25:156‐187.
[23]
Rossi B, Russo B, Succi G. Evaluation of a migration to Open Source Software. Handbook of Research on Open Source Software: Technological, Economic; 2007:309.
[24]
Fitzgerald B. Open source software adoption: anatomy of success and failure. Multi‐Disciplinary Advancement in Open Source Software and Processes. 2011:1‐23.
[25]
Fitzgerald B, Kesan JP, Russo B, Shaikh M, Succi G. Adopting Open Source Software: A Practical Guide. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2011;186.
[26]
Wang X, Conboy K, Pikkarainen M. Assimilation of agile practices in use. Inf Syst J. 2012;22:435‐455.
[27]
Larman C, Vodde B. Practices for Scaling Lean & Agile Development: Large, Multisite, and Offshore Product Development with Large‐Scale Scrum. New York: Pearson Education; 2010.
[28]
Larman C, Vodde B. Scaling agile development. CrossTalk. 2013;9:8‐12.
[29]
Reifer DJ, Maurer F, Erdogmus H. Scaling agile methods. IEEE Software. 2003;20:12‐14.
[30]
Freudenberg S, Sharp H. The top 10 burning research questions from practitioners. Ieee Software. 2010;27:8‐9.
[31]
Paasivaara M, Lassenius C. Scaling scrum in a large distributed project. In: 2011 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). IEEE; 2011:363‐367.
[32]
Kasauli R, Knauss E, Nilsson A, Klug S. Adding value every sprint: a case study on large‐scale continuous requirements engineering. In: REFSQ Workshops; 2017; Essen, Germany.
[33]
Hobbs B, Petit Y. Agile methods on large projects in large organizations. Proj Manag J. 2017;48:3‐19.
[34]
Dikert K, Paasivaara M, Lassenius C. Challenges and success factors for large‐scale agile transformations: a systematic literature review. J Syst Softw. 2016;119:87‐108.
[35]
Scaled Agile Inc. SAFe 4.0 Introduction A Scaled Agile Inc. White Paper July 2016 Overview of the Scaled Agile Framework for Lean Software and Systems Engineering. tech. rep.,  Scaled Agile, Inc.5480 Valmont Rd, Suite 100, Boulder CO 80301 USA; 2016.
[36]
Leffingwell D. SAFe® 4.0 Reference Guide: Scaled Agile Framework® for Lean Software and Systems Engineering: Addison‐Wesley Professional; 2016.
[37]
Brydon‐Miller M, Greenwood D, Maguire P. Why action research?; 2003.
[38]
Easterbrook S, Singer J, Storey M‐A, Damian D. Selecting empirical methods for software engineering research. Guide to Advanced Empirical Software Engineering. 2008:285‐311.
[39]
Schön E‐M, Thomaschewski J, Escalona MJ. Agile requirements engineering: a systematic literature review. Computer Standards & Interfaces. 2017;49:79‐91.
[40]
Torrecilla‐Salinas CJ, Sedeño J, Escalona MJ, Mejías M. Agile, Web engineering and capability maturity model integration: a systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol. 2016;71:92‐107.
[41]
Budgen D, Turner M, Brereton P, Kitchenham B. Using mapping studies in software engineering. In: Proceedings of PPIG. Lancaster University; 2008; United Kingdom:195‐204.
[42]
Petersen K, Feldt R, Mujtaba S, Mattsson M. Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE'08. BCS Learning & Development Ltd.; 2008; Swindon, UK:68‐77.
[43]
Pergher M, Rossi B. Requirements prioritization in software engineering: a systematic mapping study. In: 2013 IEEE Third International Workshop on Empirical Requirements Engineering (EmpiRE). IEEE; 2013:40‐44.
[44]
Sjoberg DIK, Dyba T, Jorgensen M. The future of empirical methods in software engineering research. In: 2007 Future of Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society; 2007; Los Alamitos, CA:358‐378.
[45]
Coughlan P, Coghlan D. Action research for operations management. Int J Oper Prod Manag. 2002;22:220‐240.
[46]
Baskerville RL, Wood‐Harper AT. A Critical Perspective on Action Research as a Method for Information Systems Research. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. 169–190.
[47]
Avison DE, Lau F, Myers MD, Nielsen PA. Action research. Commun ACM. 1999;42:94‐97.
[48]
Dingsøyr T, Fægri TE, Itkonen J. What Is Large in Large‐Scale? A Taxonomy of Scale for Agile Software Development. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2014. 273–276.
[49]
Dingsøyr T, Moe NB. Towards principles of large‐scale agile development. In: International Conference on Agile Software Development. Springer; 2014:1‐8.
[50]
Moe NB, Dingsøyr T. Emerging research themes and updated research agenda for large‐scale agile development: a summary of the 5th international workshop at XP2017. In: Proceedings of the XP2017 Scientific Workshops, Vol. 14. ACM; 2017.
[51]
Alqudah M, Razali R. A review of scaling agile methods in large software development. Int J Adv Sci Eng Inf Technol. 2016;6:828‐837.
[52]
Sutherland J. Agile can scale: inventing and reinventing SCRUM in five companies. Cutter IT Journal. 2001;14(12):5‐11.
[53]
Ambler SW, Lines M. Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Upper Saddle River, NJ: IBM Press; 2012.
[54]
Schwaber K, Nexus Guide. The definitive guide to Nexus: the exoskeleton of scaled Scrum development. PDF). scrum. org. 2015.
[55]
Thompson K. Recipes for agile governance in the enterprise; 2013.
[56]
One V. 11th annual state of agile survey. Technical report,  Version One; 2017.
[57]
One V. 10th annual state of agile survey. Technical report,  Version One; 2016.
[58]
Alliance A. Scrum of Scrums. Online at http://www. agilemanifesto. org. 2001;6.
[59]
Frank A, Hartel C. Feature teams collaboratively building products from ready to done. In: Agile Conference, 2009. AGILE'09. IEEE; 2009:320‐325.
[60]
Ambler SW, Lines M. Going beyond Scrum: disciplined agile delivery. Disciplined Agile Consortium. White Paper Series. 2013:1‐16.
[61]
Bittner K, Kong P, Naiburg E, West D. The Nexus Framework for Scaling Scrum: Continuously Delivering an Integrated Product with Multiple Scrum Teams: Addison‐Wesley Professional; 2017.
[62]
Wenger E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
[63]
Kahkonen T. Agile methods for large organizations‐building communities of practice. In: Agile Development Conference, 2004. IEEE; 2004; Los Alamitos, CA:2‐10.
[64]
Borzillo S, Schmitt A, Antino M. Communities of practice: keeping the company agile. J Bus Strateg. 2012;33:22‐30.
[65]
Kitchenham BA, Dyba T, Jorgensen Magne. Evidence‐based software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society; 2004; Edinburgh, Scotland:273‐281.
[66]
Dyba T, Kitchenham BA, Jorgensen M. Evidence‐based software engineering for practitioners. IEEE software. 2005;22:58‐65.
[67]
Kitchenham B, Brereton OP, Budgen D, Turner M, Bailey J, Linkman S. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering—a systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol. 2009;51:7‐15.
[68]
Arksey H, O'Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8:19‐32.
[69]
Budgen D, Brereton P. Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM; 2006; Shanghai, China:1051‐1052.
[70]
Benzies KM, Premji S, Hayden KA, Serrett K. State‐of‐the‐evidence reviews: advantages and challenges of including grey literature. Worldviews Evid‐Based Nurs. 2006;3:55‐61.
[71]
Hayes W. Research synthesis in software engineering: a case for meta‐analysis. In: Software Metrics Symposium, 1999. Proceedings. Sixth International. IEEE; 1999:143‐151.
[72]
Vallon R, Strobl S, Bernhart M, Grechenig T. Inter‐organizational co‐development with scrum: experiences and lessons learned from a distributed corporate development environment. In: International Conference on Agile Software Development. Springer; 2013; Berlin:150‐164.
[73]
Moe NB. Key Challenges of Improving Agile Teamwork. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2013. 76–90.
[74]
Paasivaara M, Lassenius C. Scaling Scrum in a large globally distributed organization: a case study. In: 2016 IEEE 11th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE); 2016:74‐83.
[75]
Long K, Starr D. Agile supports improved culture and quality for healthwise. In: Proceedings of the Agile 2008, AGILE '08. IEEE Computer Society; 2008; Washington, DC, USA:160‐165.
[76]
Schnitter J, Mackert O. Large‐Scale Agile Software Development at SAP AG. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2011. 209–220.
[77]
Atlas A. Accidental adoption: the story of Scrum at Amazon.com. In: 2009 Agile Conference; 2009:135‐140.
[78]
Hanly S, Wai L, Meadows L, Leaton R. Agile coaching in British Telecom: making strawberry jam. In: AGILE 2006 (AGILE'06), Vol. 9; 2006:202.
[79]
Paasivaara M, Lassenius C, Heikkila VT, Dikert K, Engblom C. Integrating Global sites into the lean and agile transformation at Ericsson. In: 2013 IEEE 8th International Conference on Global Software Engineering; 2013:134‐143.
[80]
Paasivaara M, Behm B, Lassenius C, Hallikainen M. Towards rapid releases in large‐scale XaaS development at Ericsson: a case study. In: 2014 IEEE 9th International Conference on Global Software Engineering; 2014:16‐25.
[81]
Schatz B, Abdelshafi I. Primavera gets agile: a successful transition to agile development. IEEE Software. 2005;22:36‐42.
[82]
Hajjdiab H, Taleb AS, Ali J. An industrial case study for scrum adoption. J Softw(Oulu). 2012;7.
[83]
Benefield G. Rolling out agile in a large enterprise. In: 2008 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Vol. 00; 2008:462.
[84]
Paasivaara M, Lassenius C. Communities of practice in a large distributed agile software development organization—Case Ericsson. Inf Softw Technol. 2014;56:1556‐1577. Special issue: Human Factors in Software Development.
[85]
Mohammadi E, Thelwall M, Haustein S, Larivière V. Who reads research articles? An altmetrics analysis of Mendeley user categories. J Assoc Inf Sci Technol. 2015;66:1832‐1846.
[86]
Mishra A, Garbajosa J, Wang X, Bosch J, Abrahamsson P. Future directions in agile research: alignments and divergence between research and practice. J Softw Evol Proc. 2017;29.
[87]
Runeson P. It takes two to Tango—an experience report on industry–academia collaboration. In: 2012 IEEE Fifth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST). IEEE; 2012:872‐877.
[88]
Wohlin C. Empirical software engineering research with industry: top 10 challenges. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Conducting Empirical Studies in Industry. IEEE Press; 2013:43‐46.
[89]
Garousi V, Petersen K, Ozkan B. Challenges and best practices in industry‐academia collaborations in software engineering: a systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol. 2016;79:106‐127.
[90]
Martínez‐Fernández S, Marques HM. Practical experiences in designing and conducting empirical studies in industry‐academia collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Conducting Empirical Studies in Industry. ACM; 2014:15‐20.
[91]
Mårtensson P, Lee AS. Dialogical action research at omega corporation. MIS Quarterly. 2004:507‐536.
[92]
Baskerville R, Wood‐Harper AT. Diversity in information systems action research methods. Eur J Inf Syst. 1998;7:90‐107.
[93]
Bradbury‐Huang H. What is good action research? Why the resurgent interest?. Action Res. 2010;8:93‐109.
[94]
Argyris C, Schön DA. Participatory action research and action science compared: a commentary. Am Behav Sci. 1989;32:612‐623.
[95]
Sato DT, Corbucci H, Bravo MV. Coding dojo: an environment for learning and sharing agile practices. In: Agile, 2008. AGILE'08. Conference. IEEE; 2008:459‐464.
[96]
Santos P, Sérgio M, Varella A, Dantas CR, Borges DB. Visualizing and managing technical debt in agile development: an experience report. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2013; Berlin, Heidelberg:121‐134.
[97]
Pikkarainen M, Haikara J, Salo O, Abrahamsson P, Still J. The impact of agile practices on communication in software development. Empir Softw Eng. 2008;13:303‐337.
[98]
Olszewska M, Heidenberg J, Weijola M, Mikkonen K, Porres I. Quantitatively measuring a large‐scale agile transformation. J Syst Softw. 2016;117:258‐273.
[99]
Davison R, Martinsons MG, Kock N. Principles of canonical action research. Inf Syst J. 2004;14:65‐86.
[100]
Santos PSM, Travassos GH. Action research use in software engineering: an initial survey. In: 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, 2009. ESEM 2009. IEEE; 2009:414‐417.
[101]
Dos Santos PSM, ravassos GH. Action research can swing the balance in experimental software engineering. In: Advances in Computers. Elsevier; 2011:205‐276.
[102]
Lau F. Toward a framework for action research in information systems studies. Inf Technol People. 1999;12:148‐176.
[103]
Nickerson RS. Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psychol. 1998;2:175.
[104]
Mynatt CR, Doherty ME, Tweney RD. Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: an experimental study of scientific inference. Q J Exp Psychol. 1977;29:85‐95.
[105]
Dybå T, Sjøberg DIK, Cruzes DS. What works for whom, where, when, and why? On the role of context in empirical software engineering. In: 2012 ACM‐IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM). IEEE; 2012:19‐28.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Developing a Taxonomy for Agile Scaling FrameworksProceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE International Workshop on Software-intensive Business10.1145/3643690.3648239(40-47)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Challenges to Sustaining Agility: An Exploratory Case StudyProceedings of the 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/3605098.3635926(810-817)Online publication date: 8-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Common LeSS Transformation PatternsProceedings of the 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/3605098.3635902(794-801)Online publication date: 8-Apr-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Software: Evolution and Process
Journal of Software: Evolution and Process  Volume 30, Issue 10
October 2018
149 pages
ISSN:2047-7473
EISSN:2047-7481
DOI:10.1002/smr.v30.10
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 17 October 2018

Author Tags

  1. action research
  2. agile adoption
  3. large‐scale agile
  4. Large‐Scale Scrum (LeSS)
  5. Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe)

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Developing a Taxonomy for Agile Scaling FrameworksProceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE International Workshop on Software-intensive Business10.1145/3643690.3648239(40-47)Online publication date: 16-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Challenges to Sustaining Agility: An Exploratory Case StudyProceedings of the 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/3605098.3635926(810-817)Online publication date: 8-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Common LeSS Transformation PatternsProceedings of the 39th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/3605098.3635902(794-801)Online publication date: 8-Apr-2024
  • (2024)Do Agile scaling approaches make a difference? an empirical comparison of team effectiveness across popular scaling approachesEmpirical Software Engineering10.1007/s10664-024-10481-529:4Online publication date: 29-May-2024
  • (2024)A longitudinal case study on Nexus transformationJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.261536:5Online publication date: 25-Apr-2024
  • (2024)A bibliometric analysis of Agile software development publications originating from TurkeyJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.260136:5Online publication date: 25-Apr-2024
  • (2023)Comparison of Agile Scaling FrameworksProceedings of the 2023 6th International Conference on Information Science and Systems10.1145/3625156.3625164(51-57)Online publication date: 11-Aug-2023
  • (2023)Identifying and Categorizing Challenges in Large-Scale Agile Software Development Projects: Insights from Two Swedish CompaniesACM SIGAPP Applied Computing Review10.1145/3610409.361041123:2(23-43)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2023
  • (2023)Identifying and Categorizing Challenges in Large-Scale Agile Software Development Projects: Insights from Two Swedish CompaniesACM SIGAPP Applied Computing Review10.1145/3610019.361002123:2(23-43)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2023
  • (2023)Challenges in Large-Scale Agile Software Development ProjectsProceedings of the 38th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing10.1145/3555776.3577662(1030-1037)Online publication date: 27-Mar-2023
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media