Crossing the Boundaries – Agile Methods in Large-Scale, Plan-Driven Organizations: A Case Study from the Financial Services Industry

  • Sina Katharina Weiss
  • Philipp BruneEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10253)


Selecting the software development methodology best-suited for a project or organization is a fundamental decision in the context of Information Systems (IS) engineering. In many industries and organizations, agile software development models are already well-established and commonly used for this purpose. However, large-scale, plan-driven organizations face additional challenges when implementing agile methods. To analyze how such organizations could make the implementation more effective, the results of a qualitative case study performed in a large-scale financial institution are presented in this paper. Based on these results, a best-practice model for their effective implementation in a complex environment is proposed. An organization-specific agile development framework and continuous stakeholder involvement are identified as crucial success factors. In addition, a successful implementation of agile methods in practice needs to be performed by dedicated individuals and cross-functional teams should be established in order to support a common understanding across organizational boundaries.


Agile methods Software development IS engineering Large organizations Organizational change 


  1. 1.
    Aldrich, H., Herker, D.: Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2(2), 217–230 (1977)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ambler, S.W.: Agile software development at scale. In: Meyer, B., Nawrocki, J.R., Walter, B. (eds.) CEE-SET 2007. LNCS, vol. 5082, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-85279-7_1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arias, E.G., Fischer, G.: Boundary objects: their role in articulating the task at hand and making information relevant to it. In: International ICSC Symposium on Interactive and Collaborative Computing (ICC 2000), Wollongong, pp. 567–574 (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bannink, S.: Challenges in the transition from waterfall to scrum - a casestudy at portbase. In: Proceedings of the 20th Twente student Conference on IT, Eschende, pp. 1–10 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barlow, J.B., Giboney, J.S., Keith, J.K., Wilson, D.W., Schuetzler, R.M.: Overview and guidance on agile development in large organizations. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 29(2), 25–44 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Beck, K.: Embracing change with extreme programming. IEEE Comput. Soc. 32(10), 70–77 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhattacherjee, A.: Social Science Research: Principles, Methods, and Practices. CreateSpace Publishing, 2 edn. (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boehm, B.: A spiral model of software development and enhancement. Computer 21(5), 61–72 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boehm, B., Turner, R.: Management challenges to implementing agile processes in traditional development organizations. IEEE Comput. Soc. 22(5), 30–39 (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carlile, P.R.: View of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organ. Sci. 13(4), 442–455 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chan, F.K.Y., Thong, J.Y.L.: Acceptance of agile methodologies: a critical review and conceptual framework. Decis. Support Syst. 46(4), 803–814 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cockburn, A., Highsmith, J.: Agile software development: the people factor. Computer 34(11), 131–133 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Corbin, J., Strauss, A.: Basics of Qualitative Research, 4th edn. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Doering, N., Bortz, J.: Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation, 5th edn. Springer, Berlin (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fitzgerald, B., Stol, K.J.: Continuous software engineering and beyond: trends and challenges. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Rapid Continuous Software Engineering - RCoSE 2014, Hyderabad, pp. 1–9 (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fitzgerald, B., Stol, K.J., O’Sullivan, R., O’Brien, D.: Scaling agile methods to regulated environments: an industry case study. In: 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), San Francisco, pp. 863–872 (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Flick, U.: Introduction Reseach Methodology. SAGE Publications Ltd., London (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Flick, U.: An Introduction to Qualitative Research, 5th edn. SAGE Publications Ltd., London (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Friedman, R.A., Podolny, J.: Differentiation of boundary spanning roles: labor negotiations and implications for role conflict. Adm. Sci. Q. 37(1), 28 (1992). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L.: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine Publishing Company, New York (1967)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Highsmith, J., Cockburn, A.: Agile software development: the business of innovation. Computer 34(9), 120–122 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hoda, R., Noble, J., Marshall, S.: Supporting self-organizing agile teams. In: Sillitti, A., Hazzan, O., Bache, E., Albaladejo, X. (eds.) XP 2011. LNBIP, vol. 77, pp. 73–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-20677-1_6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kettunen, P.: Adopting key lessons from agile manufacturing to agile software product development—a comparative study. Technovation 29(6–7), 408–422 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kettunen, P., Laanti, M.: How to steer an embedded software project: tactics for selecting the software process model. Inf. Softw. Technol. 47(9), 587–608 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Levina, N., Vaast, E.: The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Q. 29(2), 335–363 (2005)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lindvall, M., Muthig, D., Dagnino, A., Wallin, C., Stupperich, M., Kiefer, D., May, J., Kähkönen, T.: Agile software development in large organizations. Computer 37(12), 26–34 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Livermore, J.A.: Factors that impact implementing an agile software development methodology. In: Proceedings 2007 IEEE SoutheastCon, Richmond, pp. 82–86 (2007)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Marrone, J.A.: Team boundary spanning: a multilevel review of past research and proposals for the future. J. Manag. 36(4), 911–940 (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mishra, A., Dubey, D.: Suitability analysis of various software development life cycle models. Int. J. Electron. Commun. Comput. Eng. 4(6), 98–101 (2013)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nerur, S., Mahapatra, R., Mangalaraj, G.: Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies. Commun. ACM 48(5), 72–78 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    van Nes, F., Abma, T., Jonsson, H., Deeg, D.: Language differences in qualitative research: is meaning lost in translation? Eur. J. Ageing 7(4), 313–316 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Nguyen-Duc, A., Cruzes, D.S., Conradi, R.: On the role of boundary spanners as team coordination mechanisms in organizationally distributed projects. In: 2014 IEEE 9th International Conference on Global Software Engineering, Shanghai, pp. 125–134 (2014)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    O’hEocha, C., Conboy, K.: The role of the user story agile practice in innovation. In: Abrahamsson, P., Oza, N. (eds.) LESS 2010. LNBIP, vol. 65, pp. 20–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-16416-3_3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Perneger, T.V., Hudelson, P.M.: Writing a research article. Int. J. Health Care 16(3), 191–192 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pikkarainen, M., Salo, O., Kuusela, R., Abrahamsson, P.: Strengths and barriers behind the successful agile deployment-insights from the three software intensive companies in Finland. Empir. Softw. Eng. 17(6), 675–702 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pikkarainen, M., Salo, O., Still, J.: Deploying agile practices in organizations: a case study. In: Richardson, I., Abrahamsson, P., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2005. LNCS, vol. 3792, pp. 16–27. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). doi: 10.1007/11586012_3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pries-Heje, L., Pries-Heje, J.: Agile & distributed project management: a case study revealing why scrum is useful. In: European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2011), Helsinki, pp. 20–28 (2011)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pries-Heje, L., Pries-Heje, J.: Why Scrum works: a case study from an agile distributed project in Denmark and India. In: Agile Conference (AGILE), 2011, pp. 20–28 (2011)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Royce, W.W.: Managing the development of large software systems. In: ICSE 1987 Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering, Monterey, pp. 328–338 (1970)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Scheerer, A., Hildenbrand, T., Kude, T.: Coordination in large-scale agile software development: a multiteam systems perspective. In: HICSS 2014 Proceedings of the 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Auckland, pp. 4780–4788 (2014)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schwaber, K.: SCRUM development process. In: Sutherland, J., Casanave, C., Miller, J., Patel, P., Hollowell, G. (eds.) Business Object Design and Implementation, pp. 117–134. Springer, London (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Schwaber, K., Beedle, M.: Agile Software Development with Scrum, 1st edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2001)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Star, S.L., Griesemer, J.R.: Institutional ecology, ‘Translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39. Soc. Stud. Sci. 19(3), 387–420 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sureshchandra, K., Shrinivasavadhani, J.: Moving from waterfall to agile. In: Proceedings - Agile 2008 Conference, Toronto, pp. 97–101 (2008)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Sutherland, J., Viktorov, A., Blount, J., Puntikov, N.: Distributed Scrum: agile project management with outsourced development teams. In: Proceedings of the 40th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, p. 274a (2007)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Tushman, M.L., Scanlan, T.J.: Boundary spanning individuals: their role in information transfer and their antecendents. Acad. Manag. J. 24(2), 289–305 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    VersionOne Inc.: The 10th anual State of Agile report. VersionOne Incorporated (2016)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    West, D., Grant, T.: Agile Development: Mainstream Adoption Has Changed Agility. Forrester Research, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Neu-Ulm University of Applied SciencesNeu-UlmGermany

Personalised recommendations