A case study of risk management in agile systems development

A principal objective of agile development methods is to reduce risk thereby resulting in more successful and effective information systems. However, while there is an extensive body of academic literature on risk management, very little research has attempted to rigorously apply this as a lens to study risk management in agile development projects. The purpose of this research was to ascertain the extent to which risk management practices are incorporated into agile development projects. A case study was conducted involving a change management consultancy firm whose main business involved the deployment of agile approaches. The study found that while there is a perception that risk management practices are not carried out in agile environments, the extent to which risk management is conducted on these projects is in some cases just as substantial to that carried out on traditional projects. In fact, in this case it appeared that the teams were more rigorous in their risk management than is often the case

A methodology for resistance to change management in information systems projects

The rate of failed information systems development projects remains high despite increasing investments into information systems and their major importance for contemporary organizations. Resistance to change is one of the critical reasons for such high failure rates. Organizations faced resistance to change long before the emergence of first computers as it is a natural reaction to change. With the emergence of computers and introduction of information technology to organizations, resistance to change became more problematic and visible as changes became much more frequent due to the fast development of technology. Today, after several decades since first introduction of information systems to organizations and related research resistance to change still stays a hard nut to crack and is present in most information systems development projects. User resistance has been studied from different perspectives in information systems research and several theoretical explanations and checklists were proposed. Despite this, resistance management stays relatively immature and poorly researched. The sheer understanding of resistance should be enough for successful management, while resistance is typically managed together with other technical and organizational information systems development project risks. In this dissertation we addressed this problem in several ways. First, we defined the concept of stakeholder resistance. The term user resistance which is broadly used in information systems research is misleading. Users of the information system are not the only ones who can resist the change. All project stakeholders can resist it. Next, we developed a theoretical model of organizational risks which posits that organizational risks are by far more complex than technical risks. It is necessary to identify non-trivial root causes of organizational risks in order to manage them effectively otherwise risk measures could address only the symptoms instead of root causes. In accordance with the theoretical model of organizational risks, we developed a two-phased focus groups resistance management model. We consolidated diverse theoretical explanations and resistance checklists in the area of information systems research into a novel resistance checklist. We also consolidated research on information systems and project success and developed a novel information systems development project success model. Both, the proposed resistance checklist and the information systems development project success model, are used in the first phase of the proposed focus groups resistance management model. A case study was conducted in a loan process information system development project in Bank BB (fictional name due to anonymity) in order to evaluate the proposed theoretical model of organizational risks and focus groups resistance management model. In the case study, we confirmed that organizational risks can have non-trivial root causes by applying the theoretical model of organizational risks to the context of stakeholder resistance. These results indicate that existing risk management approaches are based on inadequate organizational risk theory. We also showed that the proposed focus groups resistance management model upgrades existing organizational risks management approaches and provides in-depth information that enables managers to develop appropriate resistance handling measures. The crossing from traditional to agile methods means bigger flexibility and involvement of end users in the development of information systems and research shows better information systems development project success rates. Agile methods were primarily intended for small software development projects but there is an increase of interest for their use in large information systems development projects. However, this area remains relatively immature and the success rates of large projects remain low. Existing traditional method evaluation models address mainly their technical aspects with few models also considering certain social aspects. Nevertheless, the evaluation of traditional methods stays limited to the development organization. Agile methods lower the importance of formal definition of development methodologies which means greater flexibility of agile methods. This flexibility also means typically implicit evaluation of the development methodology as only few agile methods define this activity formally (e.g., sprint retrospective in Scrum). The evaluation of agile methods is thus left to coincidences and the abilities of the project team. The evaluation of agile methods can exceed the boundaries of development organizations due to emphasized collaboration with customer organizations therefore evaluating them according to factors stemming from customer organizations. The purpose of both traditional and agile method evaluation is the optimization of the information systems development process. To approach the customer organizations even more broaden the purpose of development methodology evaluation to encompass resistance management, we first develop a meta-model of cooperation between development and customer organizations in information systems development. Next, we defined the concept of interaction elements as agile method elements and information system characteristics that stakeholders in customer organization interact with. Finally, we applied the change agent and opinion leader theory in order to develop a meta-model of information systems development methodology influence on stakeholder resistance. Based on this, we developed a novel interaction elements evaluation model. The proposed model enables improvement of those development methodology parts that can influence stakeholder resistance in customer organizations. A case study was conducted in Think!Med medical information system development project in Marand (development organization) and Division of Paediatrics of University Medical Center Ljubljana (customer organization) in order to evaluate the proposed interaction elements evaluation model. The case study showed that the proposed model provides in-depth information that enable development organizations to develop measures to improve those parts of information systems development methodology that can influence stakeholder resistance in customer organizations. Both the proposed focus groups resistance management model and the proposed interaction elements evaluation model are intended to be used in single information systems development projects. However, in contemporary organizations it is almost impossible to find isolated information systems development projects because they are practically constantly present. In this dissertation we addressed this need for continuous resistance management by developing a resistance management process. The proposed process can be integrated into existing processes of both customer and development organizations. The proposed focus groups resistance management model and the proposed interaction elements evaluation model can be both included in the proposed resistance management process. The first model is more appropriate for customer organizations and the latter for development organizations

A methodology for resistance to change management in information systems projects

The rate of failed information systems development projects remains high despite increasing investments into information systems and their major importance for contemporary organizations. Resistance to change is one of the critical reasons for such high failure rates. Organizations faced resistance to change long before the emergence of first computers as it is a natural reaction to change. With the emergence of computers and introduction of information technology to organizations, resistance to change became more problematic and visible as changes became much more frequent due to the fast development of technology. Today, after several decades since first introduction of information systems to organizations and related research resistance to change still stays a hard nut to crack and is present in most information systems development projects. User resistance has been studied from different perspectives in information systems research and several theoretical explanations and checklists were proposed. Despite this, resistance management stays relatively immature and poorly researched. The sheer understanding of resistance should be enough for successful management, while resistance is typically managed together with other technical and organizational information systems development project risks. In this dissertation we addressed this problem in several ways. First, we defined the concept of stakeholder resistance. The term user resistance which is broadly used in information systems research is misleading. Users of the information system are not the only ones who can resist the change. All project stakeholders can resist it. Next, we developed a theoretical model of organizational risks which posits that organizational risks are by far more complex than technical risks. It is necessary to identify non-trivial root causes of organizational risks in order to manage them effectively otherwise risk measures could address only the symptoms instead of root causes. In accordance with the theoretical model of organizational risks, we developed a two-phased focus groups resistance management model. We consolidated diverse theoretical explanations and resistance checklists in the area of information systems research into a novel resistance checklist. We also consolidated research on information systems and project success and developed a novel information systems development project success model. Both, the proposed resistance checklist and the information systems development project success model, are used in the first phase of the proposed focus groups resistance management model. A case study was conducted in a loan process information system development project in Bank BB (fictional name due to anonymity) in order to evaluate the proposed theoretical model of organizational risks and focus groups resistance management model. In the case study, we confirmed that organizational risks can have non-trivial root causes by applying the theoretical model of organizational risks to the context of stakeholder resistance. These results indicate that existing risk management approaches are based on inadequate organizational risk theory. We also showed that the proposed focus groups resistance management model upgrades existing organizational risks management approaches and provides in-depth information that enables managers to develop appropriate resistance handling measures. The crossing from traditional to agile methods means bigger flexibility and involvement of end users in the development of information systems and research shows better information systems development project success rates. Agile methods were primarily intended for small software development projects but there is an increase of interest for their use in large information systems development projects. However, this area remains relatively immature and the success rates of large projects remain low. Existing traditional method evaluation models address mainly their technical aspects with few models also considering certain social aspects. Nevertheless, the evaluation of traditional methods stays limited to the development organization. Agile methods lower the importance of formal definition of development methodologies which means greater flexibility of agile methods. This flexibility also means typically implicit evaluation of the development methodology as only few agile methods define this activity formally (e.g., sprint retrospective in Scrum). The evaluation of agile methods is thus left to coincidences and the abilities of the project team. The evaluation of agile methods can exceed the boundaries of development organizations due to emphasized collaboration with customer organizations therefore evaluating them according to factors stemming from customer organizations. The purpose of both traditional and agile method evaluation is the optimization of the information systems development process. To approach the customer organizations even more broaden the purpose of development methodology evaluation to encompass resistance management, we first develop a meta-model of cooperation between development and customer organizations in information systems development. Next, we defined the concept of interaction elements as agile method elements and information system characteristics that stakeholders in customer organization interact with. Finally, we applied the change agent and opinion leader theory in order to develop a meta-model of information systems development methodology influence on stakeholder resistance. Based on this, we developed a novel interaction elements evaluation model. The proposed model enables improvement of those development methodology parts that can influence stakeholder resistance in customer organizations. A case study was conducted in Think!Med medical information system development project in Marand (development organization) and Division of Paediatrics of University Medical Center Ljubljana (customer organization) in order to evaluate the proposed interaction elements evaluation model. The case study showed that the proposed model provides in-depth information that enable development organizations to develop measures to improve those parts of information systems development methodology that can influence stakeholder resistance in customer organizations. Both the proposed focus groups resistance management model and the proposed interaction elements evaluation model are intended to be used in single information systems development projects. However, in contemporary organizations it is almost impossible to find isolated information systems development projects because they are practically constantly present. In this dissertation we addressed this need for continuous resistance management by developing a resistance management process. The proposed process can be integrated into existing processes of both customer and development organizations. The proposed focus groups resistance management model and the proposed interaction elements evaluation model can be both included in the proposed resistance management process. The first model is more appropriate for customer organizations and the latter for development organizations

THE PERCEIVED EFFECTIVENESS OF THE SCALED AGILE FRAMEWORK® IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS

Software development projects experience very high failure rates. Due to the high cost of project failure, coupled with studies that found failure rates are closely tied to the software development method used, the purpose of this mixed methods exploratory case study was to examine the extent of perceived effectiveness of the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe®) in software development organizations using Complex Adaptive Systems as a lens to guide the study. This research focused on the extent of perceived effectiveness of the Scaled Agile Framework® on organizational outcomes, team management, stakeholder and customer management, management of emerging requirements and overall organizational agility. Three organizations took participated from Retail, Government and Logistics industries. Each organization transitioned from the Waterfall method to SAFe®. In all three cases, the participants reported the transition to SAFe® helped improve strategic alignment, facilitate business / IT coordination, increase speed of delivery, improve software quality, and reduce rework by applying Lean-Agile principles resulting in lower overall costs and reduced risk. Principle challenges included the need for change management and training to help assimilate the new structure, roles and responsibilities. Another significant challenge cited was the transition from project management measures (e.g., cost, scope, schedule, earned value) to SAFe® measures of throughput (i.e., working software) and value (i.e., prioritized features based on business value). Interactions with “non-SAFe®” organizations were cited as a concern for dependencies on other teams that could result in schedule and priority misalignment

Safety-Critical Systems and Agile Development: A Mapping Study

In the last decades, agile methods had a huge impact on how software is developed. In many cases, this has led to significant benefits, such as quality and speed of software deliveries to customers. However, safety-critical systems have widely been dismissed from benefiting from agile methods. Products that include safety critical aspects are therefore faced with a situation in which the development of safety-critical parts can significantly limit the potential speed-up through agile methods, for the full product, but also in the non-safety critical parts. For such products, the ability to develop safety-critical software in an agile way will generate a competitive advantage. In order to enable future research in this important area, we present in this paper a mapping of the current state of practice based on {a mixed method approach}. Starting from a workshop with experts from six large Swedish product development companies we develop a lens for our analysis. We then present a systematic mapping study on safety-critical systems and agile development through this lens in order to map potential benefits, challenges, and solution candidates for guiding future research.Comment: Accepted at Euromicro Conf. on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications 2018, Prague, Czech Republi

<i>Trace++</i>: A Traceability Approach for Agile Software Engineering

Agile methodologies have been introduced as an alternative to traditional software engineering methodologies. However, despite the advantages of using agile methodologies, the transition between traditional and agile methodologies is not an easy task. There are several problems associated with the use of agile methodologies. Examples of these problems are related to (i) lack of metrics to measure the amount of rework that occurs per sprint, (ii) interruption of a project after several iterations, (iii) changes in the requirements, (iv) lack of documentation, and (v) lack of management control. In this paper we present Trace++, a traceability technique that extends traditional traceability relationships with extra information in order to support the transition between traditional and agile software development. The use of Trace++ has been evaluated in two real projects of different software development companies to measure the benefits of using Trace++ to support agile software development

An approach to reconcile the agile and CMMI contexts in product line development

Software product line approaches produce reusable platforms and architectures for products set developed by specific companies. These approaches are strategic in nature requiring coordination, discipline, commonality and communication. The Capability Maturity Model (CMM) contains important guidelines for process improvement, and specifies "what" we must have into account to achieve the disciplined processes (among others things). On the other hand, the agile context is playing an increasingly important role in current software engineering practices, specifying "how" the software practices must be addressed to obtain agile processes. In this paper, we carry out a preliminary analysis for reconciling agility and maturity models in software product line domain, taking advantage of both.Postprint (published version