Bridging the gap between research and agile practice: an evolutionary model

  • Leonor BarrocaEmail author
  • Helen Sharp
  • Dina Salah
  • Katie Taylor
  • Peggy Gregory
Original Article


There is wide acceptance in the software engineering field that industry and research can gain significantly from each other and there have been several initiatives to encourage collaboration between the two. However there are some often-quoted challenges in this kind of collaboration. For example, that the timescales of research and practice are incompatible, that research is not seen as relevant for practice, and that research demands a different kind of rigour than practice supports. These are complex challenges that are not always easy to overcome. Since the beginning of 2013 we have been using an approach designed to address some of these challenges and to bridge the gap between research and practice, specifically in the agile software development arena. So far we have collaborated successfully with three partners and have investigated three practitioner-driven challenges with agile. The model of collaboration that we adopted has evolved with the lessons learned in the first two collaborations and been modified for the third. In this paper we introduce the collaboration model, discuss how it addresses the collaboration challenges between research and practice and how it has evolved, and describe the lessons learned from our experience.


Agile software development Action research Collaboration model 



We would like to thank our collaborators and the Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM) consortium.


  1. Abrahamsson P, Conboy K, Wang X (2009) Lots done, more to do: the current state of agile. Eur J Inf Syst 18:281–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agerfalk P, Fitzgerald B (2006) Flexible and distributed software processes: old petunias in new bowls? Commun ACM 10(49):27–34Google Scholar
  3. Arisholm E, Gallis H, Dyba T (2007) Evaluating pair programming with respect to system complexity and programmer expertise. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 33(2):65–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Avison DE, Lau F, Myers MD, Nielsen PA (1999) Action research. Commun ACM 42(1):94–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baskerville R, Myers MD (2004) Special issue on action research in information systems: making is research relevant to practice—forward. MIS Quart 28(3):329–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baskerville R, Pries-Heje J, Madsen S (2011) Post-agility: what follows a decade of agility? Information and software technology. 53(5):543–555. Accessed 30 June 2014
  7. Baskerville R, Wood-Harper T (1996) A critical perspective on action research as a method for information systems research. J Inf Tech 11(3):235–246Google Scholar
  8. Beck K (2000) Extreme programming explained: embrace change. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  9. Checkland P, Holwell S (2007) Action research. In: Kock N (ed) Information systems action research. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Cockburn A (2004) Crystal clear: a human-powered methodology for small teams. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  11. DSDM Consortium (2012) The DSDM agile project framework pocketbook. DSDM ConsortiumGoogle Scholar
  12. DSDM Consortium (2015) The DSDM UX pocketbook. DSDM ConsortiumGoogle Scholar
  13. Dingsøyr T, Dyba T, Abrahamsson P (2008) A preliminary roadmap for empirical research on agile software development. Agile 2008. IEEE Press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  14. Dingsøyr T, Nerur S, Balijepally V, Moe NB (2012) A decade of agile methodologies: towards explaining agile software development. J Syst Softw 85:1213–1221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dittrich Y, Rönkkö K, Eriksson J, Hansson C Lindeberg, Olle L (2007) Cooperative method development. Empir Softw Eng 13(3):231–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Doyle M, Williams L, Conh M, Rubin K (2014) Agile Software development in practice. In: Cantone G, Marchesi M (eds) XP, Springer, Switzerland, p 32–45, Accessed 13 Oct 2014
  17. Dybå T, Dingsøyr T (2008) Empirical studies of agile software development: a systematic review. Inf Softw Technol 50:833–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Erikson J, Lyytinen K, Siau K (2005) Agile modeling, agile software development, and extreme programming: the state of research. J Database Manag 16(4):88–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotony H, Schwartzman S, Scott P, Trow M (1994) The new production of know-ledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar
  20. Gray D, Illes P, Watson S (2011) Spanning the HRD academic practitioner divide—bridging the gap through mode 2 Research. J Eur Ind Train 35(3):247–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gregory P, Plonka L, Sharp H, Taylor KJ (2014) Bridging the gap between research and practice: the Agile Research Network. In: Proceedings of European conference on research methodology (ECRM), June, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. Hanly S, Waite L, Meadows L, Leaton R (2006) Agile coaching in British telecom: making strawberry jam. In: Proceedings of agile 2006 conferenceGoogle Scholar
  23. Hartley J, Benington J (2006) Copy and paste, or graft and transplant? Knowledge sharing through inter-organizational networks. Public Money Manag 26(2):101–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Highsmith J (2002) Agile software development ecosystems. Addison Wesley Professional, BostonGoogle Scholar
  25. Huff AS, Huff JO (2001) Re-focusing the business school agenda. Br J Manag 12:S49–S54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kieser A, Leiner L (2012) Collaborate with practitioners: but beaware of collaborative research. J Manag Inq 21:14–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Laanti M, Salo O, Abrahamsson P (2011) Agile methods rapidly replacing traditional methods at Nokia: a survey of opinions on agile transformation. Inf Softw Technol 53(3):276–290. Accessed 11 June 2014
  28. Lagerberg L, Tor S, Emanuelsson P, Sandahl K, Sthahl D (2013) The impact of agile principles and practices on large-scale software development projects: a multiple-case study of two projects at Ericsson. 2013 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, p 348–356. Accessed 27 May 2014
  29. Lamprecht SJ, van Rooyen G-J (2012) Models for technology research collaboration between industry and academia in South Africa. In: Proceedings of the 2012 software engineering colloquiumGoogle Scholar
  30. Lockett N, Kerr R, Robinson S (2008) Multiple perspectives on the challenges for knowledge transfer between higher education insititutions and industry. Int Small Bus J 26:661–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. MacLean D, MacIntosh R, Grant S (2002) Mode 2 management research. Br J Manag 13:189–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Martin A (2009) The role of customers in extreme programming projects, PhD thesis at Victoria University of WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  33. Mendes E, Al-Fakhri LB, Luxton-Reilly A (2004) Investigating pair-programming in a 2nd-year software development and design computer science course. ACM SIGCSE Bull 37(3):296–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Murphy B, Bird C, Nagappan N, Zimmermann T, Williams L, Begel A (2013) Have Agile techniques been the silver bullet for software development at Microsoft? In: 2013 ACM/IEEE international symposium on empirical software engineering and measurement, p 75–84. Accessed 8 June 2014
  35. Parker LE (1992) Industry–University collaboration in developed and developing countries, the World Bank, septemberGoogle Scholar
  36. Perkmann M, Walsh K (2010) The two faces of collaboration: impacts of university industry relations on public research, industrial and corporate change 2009Google Scholar
  37. Pertuze J, Calder E, Greitzer E, Lucas W (2010) Best practices for industry-university collaboration. MITS Loan Manag Rev 51(4):83–90Google Scholar
  38. Plonka L, Sharp H, Barroca L, Salah D, Gregory P, Taylor KJ (2014) Agile projects in a non-agile environment. Accessed 10 Oct 2014
  39. Plonka L, Sharp H, van der Linden J, Dittrich Y (2015) Knowledge transfer in pair programming: an in-depth analysis. Int J Human-Comput Stud 73. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.001
  40. Rieger C (2008) Models for academic/industry partnerships. A presentation made at the center for research on information technology and organisations, University of California at Irvine, 13 Feb 2008Google Scholar
  41. Rosemann M, Vessey I (2008) Toward improving the relevance of information systems research to practice: the role of applicability checks. MIS Q 32(1):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Santos V, Goldman A, DeSouza C, Sharp H (2013) A pattern language for inter-team knowledge sharing in agile software development. In: PLoP 2013Google Scholar
  43. Schwaber K (2004) Agile software development with scrum. Microsoft Press, RedmondzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Shani A, Coghlan D (2014) Collaborate with practitioners: an alternative perspective a rejoinder to Kieser and Leiner (2012). J Manag Inq 23:433–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sharp H, Robinson H (2004) An ethnographic study of XP practices. Empir Softw Eng 9(4):353–375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sharp H, Plonka L, Gregory P, Taylor KJ (2014a) Integrating UX design into a DSDM project: challenges, work practices and lessons learned. Accessed 10 Oct 2014
  47. Sharp H, Plonka L, Taylor KJ, Gregory AJ (2014b) Overcoming challenges in collaboration between research and practice: the Agile Research Network in proceedings of software engineering research and industrial practices (SER & IP), a workshop co-located at ICSE 2014, Hyderabad, 1 June 2014Google Scholar
  48. Svejvig P, Fladkjær Nielsen A (2010) The Dilemma of High Level Planning in Distributed Agile Software Projects: An Action Research Study in a Danish Bank. In: Šmite D, Moe NB, Ågerfalk PJ (eds) Agility across time and space. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  49. Van Waardenburg G, van Vliet H (2013) When agile meets the enterprise. Inf Softw Technol 55(12):2154–2171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Vardiman P, Mhlanga F (2010) Conceptual models of collaborative partnerships and the infusion of knowledge workers in the local IT sector. In: Conference of information systems applied research, Nashville Tennessee, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leonor Barroca
    • 1
    Email author
  • Helen Sharp
    • 1
  • Dina Salah
    • 1
  • Katie Taylor
    • 2
  • Peggy Gregory
    • 2
  1. 1.The Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK
  2. 2.University of Central LancashirePrestonUK

Personalised recommendations