Advertisement

Concerns and Limitations in Agile Software Development: A Survey with Paraguayan Companies

  • Myrian R. Noguera Salinas
  • Adolfo G. Serra Seca Neto
  • Maria Claudia F. P. Emer
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 802)

Abstract

The Agile Manifesto has been around form more than fifteen years and, all over the world, companies and researchers seek for understand their adoption stage, as well as the benefits, barriers, and limitations of agile methods. Although there are some survey studies at the global level, we know little about how the Paraguayan software community is adopting agile methods. The present work conducted a research to characterize the current stage of adoption, initial concerns and barriers on the implementation of agile methods in software development companies in Paraguay. An online survey was sent to managers of 53 Paraguayan companies. Of these, 9 (17%) managers responded. The main concern about adopting agile methods (44.44% of respondents) was the lack of reliability in product quality if developed using agile methods. The main barrier was the lack of experience (66.66%) of the companies.

Keywords

Agile methods Agile Adoption Survey Software development enterprise 

References

  1. 1.
    Beck, K., Beedle, M., Van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunninngham, W., Fowler, M., Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R., Kern, J., Marick, B., Martin, R., Mellor, S., Schwaber, K., Sutherland, J., Thomas, D.: Manifiesto for agile software development (2001). http://agilemanifesto.org/
  2. 2.
    VersionOne Inc.: 11th Annual State of Agile Survey (2016). http://www.versionone.com/
  3. 3.
    Melo, C., Santos, V., Corbucci, H., Katayama, E., Goldman, A., Kon, F.: Métodos ágeis no Brasil: estado da prática em times e organizações, Relatório Técnico RT-MAC-2012-03. Departamento de Ciência da Computação. IME-USP (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    InfoQ: Gartner and Software Advice examine Agile Lifecycle Management Tools (2015). https://www.infoq.com/news/2015/02/agile-management-tools
  5. 5.
    SoftwareAdvise: Agile Project Management Software User Report – 2015 (2015). http://www.softwareadvice.com/resources/agile-project-management-user-trends-2015/
  6. 6.
    Resti, W., Rahayu, P., Indra, D.: Challenges in agile software development: a systematic literature review. In: 2016 International Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (ICACSIS), Malang, Indonesia, pp. 155–164. IEEE Xplore (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACSIS.2016.7872736
  7. 7.
    Kamei, F., Pinto, G., Cartaxo, B., Vasconcelos, A.: On the benefits/limitations of agile software development: an interview study with Brazilian companies. In: 21st Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering Conference (EASE), Karlskrona, Sweden, pp. 154–159. ACM Digital Library (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1145/3084226.3084278
  8. 8.
    Nazir, N., Hasteer, N., Bansal, A.: A survey on agile practices in the Indian IT industry. In: 6th International Conference Cloud System and Big Data Engineering (Confluence), India. IEEEXplore (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1109/CONFLUENCE.2016.7508196
  9. 9.
    Hoda, R., Salleh, N., Grundy, J., Mien Tee, H.: Systematic literature reviews in agile software development: a tertiary study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 85, 60–70 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2017.01.007. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pinto, J., Serrador, P.: Does agile work? A quantitative analysis of agile project success. Int. J. Project Manage. 33, 1040–1051 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.01.006. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dyba, T., Dingsøyr, T.: Empirical studies of agile software development: a systematic review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 50, 833–859 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.01.006. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chow, T., Cao, D.: A survey study of critical success factors in agile software projects. J. Syst. Softw. 81, 961–971 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2007.08.020. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Melo, C., Santos, V., Katayama, E., Corbucci, H., Prikladnicki, R., Goldman, A., Kon, F.: The evolution of agile software development in Brazil – Education, research and the state of the practice. J. Braz. Comput. Soc. 523–552 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13173-013-0114-x. Springer Link
  14. 14.
    Solinski, A., Petersen, K.: Prioritizing agile benefits and limitations in relation to practice usage. Softw. Qual. J. 24, 447–482 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-014-9253-3. Springer LinkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Petersen, K., Wohlin, C.: A comparison of issues and advantages in agile and incremental development between state of the art and an industrial case. J. Syst. Softw. 82, 1479–1490 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2009.03.036. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pikkarainen, M., Haikara, J., Salo, O., Abrahamsson, P., Still, J.: The impact of agile practices on communication in software development. Empir. Softw. Eng. 13, 303–337 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10664-008-9065-9. Springer LinkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chandra, S., Kumar, V., Kumar, U.: Identifying some important success factors in adopting agile software development practices. J. Syst. Softw. 82, 1869–1890 (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2009.05.052. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Laanti, M., Salo, O., Abrahamsson, P.: Agile methods rapidly replacing traditional methods at Nokia: a survey of opinions on agile transformation. Inf. Softw. Technol. 53, 276–290 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.11.010. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Javdani, T., Ziaei, M.: Agile transition and adoption human-related challenges and issues: a Grounded Theory approach. Comput. Hum. Behav. 62, 257–266 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.009. ScienceDirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Corbucci, H., Melo, C., Santos, V., Katayama, E., Goldman, A., Kon, F.: Genesis and evolution of the agile movement in Brazil - a perspective from the academia and the industry. In: 25th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES). IEEE Xplore (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1109/SBES.2011.26
  21. 21.
    Bissi, W., Neto, A., Emer, M.C.: The effects of test driven development on internal quality, external quality and productivity: a systematic review. Inf. Softw. Technol. 74, 45–54 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2016.02.004. Science DirectCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lima, V., Neto, A., Emer, M.C.: Investigação experimental e práticas ágeis: ameaças à validade de experimentos envolvendo a prática ágil Programação em par. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Brazilian Workshop on Agile Methods (WBMA’2012) (2012).  https://doi.org/10.5329/RESI.2014.1301005
  23. 23.
    Tissot, A., Neto, A., Emer, M.C.: Influence of the review of executed activities utilizing Planning Poker. In: 29th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering (SBES). IEEE Xplore (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1109/SBES.2015.26

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Academic Department of InformaticsFederal University of TechnologyCuritibaBrazil

Personalised recommendations