A study of value in agile software development organizations

Alahyari, Hiva; Svensson, Richard Berntsson; Gorschek, Tony

doi:10.1016/j.jss.2016.12.007

Cited by 80 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides the secondary studies presented in Section 1 ([4], [9], [41]), there have been some empirical studies investigating stakeholders value propositions in relation to product management (studies close to the scope of this research) (e.g. [10], [12], [13], [42]- [46]). However, these studies, which are further discussed in Section 5, differ from our approach in three distinct ways:…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…feature selection). Moreover, the SVM does not look into how differ-ent companies interpret value and which value propositions are truly important in practice [10]. The few empirical studies on the topic (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The few empirical studies on the topic (e.g. [10], [12], [13]), which are further developed in Sections 2 and 5, provide preliminary insights into the concept of value. However, their findings are limited due to shortcomings with the research method used (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, the work on requirements prioritization has not been value-neutral. Still, its main focus has not been on understanding value or providing empirical evidence on value, leaving the notion of value vague or implicit [10], [13]. Differently, our study focuses on understanding explicitly the value propositions that stakeholders employ when selecting features for a release.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Key Stakeholders’ Value Propositions for Feature Selection in Software-Intensive Products: An Industrial Case Study

Rodríguez

Mendes

Turhan

2020

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous software companies are adopting value-based decision making. However, what does value mean for key stakeholders making decisions? How do different stakeholder groups understand value? Without an explicit understanding of what value means, decisions are subject to ambiguity and vagueness, which are likely to bias them. This case study provides an in-depth analysis of key stakeholders' value propositions when selecting features for a large telecommunications company's software-intensive product. Stakeholders' value propositions were elicited via interviews, which were analyzed using Grounded Theory coding techniques (open and selective coding). Thirty-six value propositions were identified and classified into six dimensions: customer value, market competitiveness, economic value/profitability, cost efficiency, technology & architecture, and company strategy. Our results show that although propositions in the customer value dimension were those mentioned the most, the concept of value for feature selection encompasses a wide range of value propositions. Moreover, stakeholder groups focused on different and complementary value dimensions, calling to the importance of involving all key stakeholders in the decision making process. Although our results are particularly relevant to companies similar to the one described herein, they aim to generate a learning process on value-based feature selection for practitioners and researchers in general.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Key Stakeholders’ Value Propositions for Feature Selection in Software-Intensive Products: An Industrial Case Study

Rodríguez

Mendes

Turhan

2020

IIEEE Trans. Software Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These are summarized in Table 6. [30,43,53,54] Of these eight roles, four (Architect/Software Designer, Developer/Senior Engineer, Team Leader, and Test Lead) would be considered technical roles, and three (Project Manager, Project Lead, Head of Department) are management roles. In total, nine of fifteen papers reported the Scrum Master also taking on some kind of management role, with six explicitly mentioning "Project Manager" or "Project Lead.…”

Section: Systematic Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Product-Focused Software Process Improvement

2017

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Scrum is an increasingly common approach to software development adopted by organizations around the world. However, as organizations transition from traditional plan-driven development to agile development with Scrum, the question arises as to which Scrum role (Product Owner, Scrum Master, or Scrum Team Member) corresponds to a Project Manager, or conversely which Scrum role should the Project Managers adopt?In an attempt to answer this question, we adopted a mixed-method research approach comprising a systematic literature review and embedded case study of a commercial software development team. Our research has identified activities that comprise the Scrum Master role, and which additional roles are actually performed by Scrum Masters in practice. We found nine activities that are performed by Scrum Masters. In addition, we found that Scrum Masters also perform other roles, most importantly as Project Managers. This latter situation results in tension and conflict of interest that could have a negative impact on the performance of the team as a whole. These results point to the need to re-assess the role of Project Managers in organizations that adopt Scrum as a development approach. We hypothesize that it might be better for Project Managers to become Product Owners, as aspects of this latter role are more consistent with the traditional responsibilities of a Project Manager.

show abstract

Agile practices and the promotion of entrepreneurial skills in software development

Tolfo

Wazlawick

Ferreira

et al. 2018

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article addresses the relationships between agile development and entrepreneurship. The objective of the study is to verify that the adoption of agile practices can promote entrepreneurial skills in software developers. In this study, agile practices were related to entrepreneurial skills, and developers of the software industry and academia professors were invited to contribute. Questionnaires were sent to the participants to obtain their opinion regarding this research. Participants also opined about the possibility of entrepreneurial skills being an observable behavior in agile culture, ie, if they are visible artifacts of agile culture. As a result, the study found a set of agile practices that promote entrepreneurial skills in software developers. That is, it was found that agile practices promote entrepreneurial behavior in these professionals. These entrepreneurial skills are sustained by the same basic values and assumptions that were learned by developers to resolve internal integration and external adaptation issues during the adoption of agile practices. In this article, an integration model has been adapted from other areas, thereby opening a new field of study involving the relationships between academic research and professional practice on entrepreneurship in the software area and agile development.

show abstract

A study of value in agile software development organizations

Cited by 80 publications

References 35 publications

Key Stakeholders’ Value Propositions for Feature Selection in Software-Intensive Products: An Industrial Case Study

Key Stakeholders’ Value Propositions for Feature Selection in Software-Intensive Products: An Industrial Case Study

Product-Focused Software Process Improvement

Agile practices and the promotion of entrepreneurial skills in software development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About