Who Is Stronger in Your Agile Deployment – The Id or the Superego?

  • Stavros Stavru
  • Sylvia Ilieva
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 111)


Many studies and industrial reports have demonstrated the tendency towards the increasing number of organizations, interested in agile software development. With the transition from intentions to actions, the question that naturally arises is how the deployment process should be approached. In this paper we argue that shared organizational values, which we call organizational Superego, should be the main drivers for the deployment and post-deployment assessment of agile methods and techniques. Along with that we propose a new organizational classification technique, which assesses the power of the Superego to shape organizational behavior, together with an organizational value framework to be used for strengthening it. We further discuss how a strong Superego would approach the deployment of agile methods and techniques, and outline a future agile deployment framework, based on organizational values.


Agile Adoption Deployment and Post-Deployment Assessment of Agile Methods and Techniques Organizational Values Organizational Culture 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Abrahamsson, P., Conboy, K., Wang, X.: ‘Lots done, more to do’: the current state of agile systems development research. Eur. J. Info. Sys. 18, 281–284 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jaakson, K.: Management by values: are some values better than others. Man. Dev. 29, 795–806 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dolan, S., Garcia, S.: Managing by Values: Cultural redesign for strategic organizational change at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Man. Dev. 21, 101–117 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iivari, J., Iivari, N.: The relationship between organizational culture and the deployment of agile methods. Info. Soft. Tech. 53, 509–520 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    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. Empi. Software Eng., 1–28 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Esfahani, H.C., Yu, E., Annosi, M.C.: Strategically balanced process adoption. In: International Conference on Software and Systems Process, Hawaii, pp. 169–178 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Soundararajan, S., Arthur, J.D.: A Structured framework for assessing the ”goodness” of agile methods. In: 18th IEEE International Conference and Workshops on Engineering of Computer-Based Systems, pp. 14–23. IEEE Press, Las Vegas (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krasteva, I., Ilieva, S., Dimov, A.: Experience-Based Approach for Adoption of Agile Practices in Software Development Projects. In: Pernici, B. (ed.) CAiSE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6051, pp. 266–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jung, T., et al.: Instruments for exploring organizational culture: A review of the literature. Public Admin. Review 69, 1087–1096 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freud, S.: The Ego and the Id. The Hogarth Press Ltd., London (1949)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    The Aspen Institute: Deriving Value from Corporate Values (2005) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kotter, J.P., Heskett, J.L.: Corporate culture and performance. Free Press (1992) Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cornelissen, J.P., Kafouros, M., Lock, A.R.: Metaphorical images of organization: How organizational researchers develop and select organizational metaphors. Human Relations 58, 1545–1578 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stavros Stavru
    • 1
  • Sylvia Ilieva
    • 1
  1. 1.Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”SofiaBulgaria

Personalised recommendations