An Objective Compliance Analysis of Project Management Process in Main Agile Methodologies with the ISO/IEC 29110 Entry Profile

Abstract

Software Process Improvement efforts (SPI) are pursued by organizations for improving the overall quality of their software development processes. However, very small entities (VSEs) avoid them by the lack of required financial and other organizational resources. In contrast, VSEs use agile software development methodologies (ASDMs), but these ASDMs do not foster adherence to best scholastic practices promoted by SPI. Furthermore, while a new ISO/IEC standard (29110) has been recently released for VSEs, it was not designed taking account the ASDM approaches. Thus, we investigate the extent of adherence of main ASDMs (two industrial and one academic type) with this new standard. Initial results provide evidence on the strong need to enhance the two industrial ASDMs (XP and SCRUM). In contrast, the academic ASDM (UPEDU) fits the standard very well but it is scarcely used by VSEs. Hence, it is concluded that there is a knowledge gap between the praxis with ASDMs and the recommended scholastic software processes like the ISO/IEC 29110 standard for VSEs.

A Means-Ends Design of SCRUM+: an agile-disciplined balanced SCRUM enhanced with the ISO/IEC 29110 Standard

“…In this research, we used the following materials: 1) the ISO/IEC 29110 Entry Profile document [22]; 2) the official guides for SCRUM [20,21]; 3) a SCRUM book [26]; 4) a SCRUM EPG (Electronic Process Guide) [27]; and 5) a coverage analysis of SCRUM regarding the ISO/IEC 29110 Entry Profile Project Management process [28].…”

“…To design SCRUM+ as a balanced agility-disciplined enhanced SCRUM methodology, we start from the results reported in [28] regarding a thoroughly analysis of the coverage of SCRUM, XP and UPEDU Project Management processes regarding the ISO/IEC 29110 (Entry Profile, Project Management process). According to [35] SCRUM, XP and UPEDU had respectively an overall coverage of moderate (79%), low (51%) and high level (93%) respectively.…”