XP / Architecture (XA): A Collaborative Learning Process for Agile Methodologies When Teams Grow

  • Luis Freddy Muñoz-SanabriaEmail author
  • Julio Ariel Hurtado Alegría
  • Francisco Javier Álvarez Rodriguez
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 847)


Agile methodologies have proven their effectiveness in small teams; among them, Extreme Programming (XP) as the most used by the software industry and the scientific community. However, there are reports that report problems in applying agile parameters when the development team grows, and the project becomes more complex. The software architecture emerges as a mechanism to solve complexity and collaboration problems for complex projects and large development teams. This research proposes a method based on criteria of collaboration and Extreme Programming (XP) called Xp / Architecture (XA), to apply agile methods when the equipment grows, taking advantage of the capacity of the architecture methods proposed by the system engineering institute (SEI). Different XP teams work collaboratively in coordination with a team that incorporates agile architectural practices. The XA method was applied to three software projects, obtaining as a result, that the proposed model allowed to adhere Extreme Programming to larger teams and maintained the productivity proposed by the agile methodologies.


Software architecture Collaboration Agile methods Software process Extreme programing 


  1. 1.
    Fedesoft. News ICT: (2011).
  2. 2.
    Canos, J.H., Penadés, C.: Agile methodologies in software development. In: VIII Conference on Software Engineering and Databases (JISBD) (2003). 123456789/476Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Costello, R.J., Liu, D.B.: Metrics for requirements engineering. J. Syst. Softw. (1995).
  4. 4.
    Beck, K., Andres, C.: Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, US (2004). ISBN: 0-201-61641-6Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pendharkar, P.C., Roger, J.A.: The relationship between software development software development team size and cost. Commun. ACM 52(1), 141–144 (2009). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nord, R.L., Tomayko, J.E.: Architecture-centric software development agile metodsand. IEEE Softw. 23(2), 47–53 (2006). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hadar, E., Silberman, G.M.: Architecture agile methodology: long term short term strategy interleaved with practics. In: 23rd ACM in Companion to the SIGPLAN Conference on Object-Oriented Languages and Applications Programming Systems be. Companion OOPSLA 2008, pp. 641–652. ACM, New York (2008).
  8. 8.
    Abrahamsson, O.S., Ronkainen, .J.: Agile software development methods: review and analysis. VTT Electr. (2002).
  9. 9.
    Kornstadt, A., Sauer, J.: Tackling offshore challenges with agile communication architecture-centric development. Working in Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, ser. WICSA 2007. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2007).
  10. 10.
    Jensen, R.N., Møller, T., Sönder, P., Tjørnehøj, G.: Architecture and design in eXtreme programming; introducing “Developer Stories”. In: Abrahamsson, P., Marchesi, M., Succi, G. (eds.) XP 2006. LNCS, vol. 4044, pp. 133–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Reifer, D.J., Maurer, F., Erdogmus, M.H.: Scaling agile methods. IEEE Softw. 20(4), 12–14 (2003). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Layman, L., Williams, L., Cunningham, L.: Exploring Extreme Programming in context: an industrial case study. In: Proceedings of in the Agile Development Conference, to be. ADC 2004, pp. 32–41. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2004).
  13. 13.
    Maurer, F., Martel, S.: On the productivity of agile software practices: an industrial case study. In: International Workshop on Software Engineering Economics-Driven Researh (EDSER). & type = ccGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wells, D.: Extreme Programming to Gentle Introduction (2012). (2002)
  15. 15.
    Beck, K., Beedle, M., Bennekum, A.V., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W.: Manifesto for agile software development (2009).
  16. 16.
    Wojcik, R., et al.: Attribute-Driven Design (ADD), Version 2.0. Software Engineering Institute, no. CMU / SEI-2006-TR-023 (2006). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barbacci, M.R., Ellison, R.J., Lattanze, A.J., Stafford, J.A., Weinstock, C.B., Wood, W.G., Quality Attribute Workshops QAW -third Edition, Carnegie Mellon, Technical report CMU / SEI-2003-TR-016 (2003). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Muñoz, F., Hurtado, J.: XP / Architecture. Technical report, IDIS-TR-002 (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dyb, T., Dingsøyr, T.: Empirical studies of agile software development: a systematic review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50(9–10), 833–859 (2008). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Runeson, P., Host, M.: Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical Softw. Eng. 14(2), 131–164 (2009). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Muñoz, F., Hurtado, J.: XA: an extension for supporting XP architecture practices. In: 2012 7th Colombian Digital Object Identifier Computing Congress (CCC), 10.1109/Colombian CC.2012.6398012 (2012).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fundación Universitaria de PopayánCaucaColombia
  2. 2.University of CaucaPopayán, CaucaColombia
  3. 3.University of AguascalientesAguascalientesMexico

Personalised recommendations