Advertisement

Role of Architects in Agile Organizations

  • Antonio MartiniEmail author
  • Lars Pareto
  • Jan Bosch
Chapter

Abstract

Agile software development is broadly adopted in industry and works well for small-scale projects. In the context of large-scale development, however, there is a need for additional structure in the form of roles and practices, especially in the area of software architecture. In this chapter, we introduce the CAFFEA framework that defines a model for architecture governance. The framework defines three roles, i.e., chief architect, governance architect, and team architect, as well as a set of practices and responsibilities assigned to these roles. The CAFFEA framework has been developed and validated in close collaboration with several companies.

Keywords

Team Architect Software Product Line Reference Architecture Architecture Evolution Agile Practice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Dingsøyr, T., Nerur, S., Balijepally, V., Moe, N.B.: A decade of agile methodologies: towards explaining agile software development. J. Syst. Softw. 85(6), 1213–1221 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Daneva, M., van der Veen, E., Amrit, C., Ghaisas, S., Sikkel, K., Kumar, R., Ajmeri, N., Ramteerthkar, U., Wieringa, R.: Agile requirements prioritization in large-scale outsourced system projects: an empirical study. J. Syst. Softw. 86(5), 1333–1353 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kruchten, P.: What do software architects really do? J. Syst. Softw. 81(12), 2413–2416 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tang, A., Avgeriou, P., Jansen, A., Capilla, R., Ali Babar, M.: A comparative study of architecture knowledge management tools. J. Syst. Softw. 83(3), 352–370 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pareto, L., Eriksson, P., Ehnebom, S.: Architectural descriptions as boundary objects in system and design work. Model Driven Eng. Lang. Syst. 6395, 406–419 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Williams, B.J., Carver, J.C.: Characterizing software architecture changes: a systematic review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 52(1), 31–51 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Silva, L., Balasubramaniam, D.: Controlling software architecture erosion: a survey. J. Syst. Softw. 85(1), 132–151 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Qumer, A.: Defining an integrated agile governance for large agile software development environments. In: Concas, G., Damiani, E., Scotto, M., Succi, G. (eds.) Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming, pp. 157–160. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Drury, M., Conboy, K., Power, K.: Obstacles to decision making in Agile software development teams. J. Syst. Softw. 85(6), 1239–1254 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zimmermann, O., Miksovic, C., Küster, J.M.: Reference architecture, metamodel, and modeling principles for architectural knowledge management in information technology services. J. Syst. Softw. 85(9), 2014–2033 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Unphon, H., Dittrich, Y.: Software architecture awareness in long-term software product evolution. J. Syst. Softw. 83(11), 2211–2226 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McAvoy, J., Butler, T.: The impact of the Abilene Paradox on double-loop learning in an agile team. Inf. Softw. Technol. 49(6), 552–563 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martini, A., Pareto, L., Bosch, J.: Enablers and inhibitors for speed with reuse. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Software Product Line Conference, vol. 1, pp. 116–125. New York, USA (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martini, A., Pareto, L., Bosch, J.: Communication factors for speed and reuse in large-scale agile software development. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Software Product Line Conference, pp. 42–51. New York, USA, (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bosch, J., Bosch-Sijtsema, P.M.: Introducing agile customer-centered development in a legacy software product line. Softw. Pract. Exp. 41(8), 871–882 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leffingwell, D.: Scaling Software Agility: Best Practices for Large Enterprises. Pearson Education (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Strauss A., Corbin, J.M.: Grounded Theory in Practice. SAGE (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tom, E., Aurum, A., Vidgen, R.: An exploration of technical debt. J. Syst. Softw. 86(6), 1498–1516 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nord, R.L., Ozkaya, I., Kruchten, P., Gonzalez-Rojas, M.: In search of a metric for managing architectural technical debt. In: 2012 Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA) and European Conference on Software Architecture (ECSA), pp. 91–100 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martini, A., Bosch, J., Chaudron, M.: Architecture technical debt: understanding causes and a qualitative model. Presented at 40th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, Verona, pp. 85–92 (2014). doi: 10.1109/SEAA.2014.65

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg UniversityGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations