Agile Maturity Model: A Synopsis as a First Step to Synthesis

Schweigert, Tomas; Vohwinkel, Detlef; Korsaa, Morten; Nevalainen, Risto; Bíró, Miklós

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39179-8_19

Cited by 22 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a systematic review of literature, Schweigert et al identifies around 40 maturity models for agile development. The analysis concluded that, despite an urgent need for agile maturity models, currently none of the models proposed in the literature is widely referred in practice and academia.…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the adoption level of scaled agile development: a maturity model for Scaled Agile Framework

Türetken

Stojanov

Trienekens

2016

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the agile software development approaches have gained wide acceptance in practice, the concerns regarding the scalability and integration of agile practices in traditional large‐scale system development projects are prevailing. Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) has emerged as a solution to address some of these concerns. Despite few encouraging results, case studies indicate several challenges of SAFe adoption. Currently, there is a lack of a well‐structured gradual approach for establishing SAFe. Before and during SAFe adoption, organizations can benefit greatly from a uniform model for assessing the current progress, and establishing a roadmap for the initiative. To address this need, we developed a maturity model that provides guidance for software developing organizations in defining a roadmap for adopting SAFe. The model can also be used to assess the level of SAFe adoption. We took an existing agile maturity model as a basis for agile practices and extended it with practices that are key to SAFe. The model was developed and refined with industry experts using the Delphi technique. A case study was conducted in a large organization where we evaluated the model by applying it to assess the level of SAFe adoption. © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Software: Evolution and Process Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the adoption level of scaled agile development: a maturity model for Scaled Agile Framework

Türetken

Stojanov

Trienekens

2016

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Besides, as stated before, during our review process we have not been able to gather any work analyzing the relation among Agile, Web Engineering and CMMI on its continuous representation. Lastly, despite we were able to identify papers studying Agile Maturity Models like [48] and [49], none of them are providing the Web dimension. As a conclusion, these three aspects (the relation among Agile, Web Engineering and ISO/IEC process standards, CMMI continuous representation and Agile Maturity Models) remain as three open research areas to further development.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Agile, Web Engineering and Capability Maturity Model Integration: A systematic literature review.

Torrecilla-Salinas

Sedeño

Cuaresma

et al. 2016

Information and Software Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…They found almost all of the inspected models being independently defined from any agile method, yet all inspected models show deficiencies, notably regarding completeness of the models, correctness and consistency, and the definition of agility levels. Similarly, Schweigert et al analyzed the state of the art concerning agile maturity models. The authors analyzed a subset of approximately 40 agile maturity models and concluded that there is no consensus about a model for agile maturity.…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

How has SPI changed in times of agile development? Results from a multi‐method study

Küpper

Pfahl

Jürisoo

et al. 2019

J Software Evolu Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The emergence of agile methods and practices has not only changed the development processes but might also have affected how companies conduct software process improvement (SPI).Through a set of complementary studies, we aim to understand how SPI has changed in times of agile software development. Specifically, we aim (a) to identify and characterize the set of publications that connect elements of agility to SPI, (b) to explore to which extent agile methods/practices have been used in the context of SPI, and (c) to understand whether the topics addressed in the literature are relevant and useful for industry professionals. To study these questions, we conducted an in-depth analysis of the literature identified in a previous mapping study, an interview study, and an analysis of the responses given by industry professionals to SPI-related questions stemming from an independently conducted survey study. Regarding the first question, we identified 55 publications that focus on both SPI and agility of which 48 present and discuss how agile methods/practices are used to steer SPI initiatives. Regarding the second question, we found that the two most frequently mentioned agile methods in the context of SPI are Scrum and Extreme Programming (XP), while the most frequently mentioned agile practices are integrate often, test-first, daily meeting, pair programming, retrospective, on-site customer, and product backlog. Regarding the third question, we found that a majority of the interviewed and surveyed industry professionals see SPI as a continuous activity. They agree with the agile SPI literature that agile methods/practices play an important role in SPI activities but that the importance given to specific agile methods/practices does not always coincide with the frequency with which these methods/practices are mentioned in the literature. KEYWORDSagile methods, software process improvement, SPI, systematic review INTRODUCTIONSoftware has become the key driver in many industry sectors, and software development processes face increasing demands for flexibility, customer-and value-orientation, short time-to-market cycles, and high quality. As a consequence, companies are challenged with finding appropriate software development methods that, on the one hand, allow for flexible project operation and, on the other hand, allow for creating high-quality products. To define, adapt, evaluate, and improve their software processes, companies implement software process improvement (SPI) initiatives. According to Humphrey 1 and Münch et al, 2 SPI comprises a variety of tasks, ie, scoping, assessment, design and realization, and continuous improvement. Furthermore, SPI is considered relevant to companies 3 regardless of their size and industry sector.SPI has been around for decades, 4 and numerous approaches to conduct SPI have been proposed. 5,6 The different SPI approaches range from formal/prescriptive/de-facto (commercial) standards, such as the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) or ISO/IEC 15504, which are often critic...

show abstract

Agile Maturity Model: A Synopsis as a First Step to Synthesis

Cited by 22 publications

References 12 publications

Assessing the adoption level of scaled agile development: a maturity model for Scaled Agile Framework

Assessing the adoption level of scaled agile development: a maturity model for Scaled Agile Framework

Agile, Web Engineering and Capability Maturity Model Integration: A systematic literature review.

How has SPI changed in times of agile development? Results from a multi‐method study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About