Migrating Defect Management from Waterfall to Agile Software Development in a Large-Scale Multi-site Organization: A Case Study

  • Kirsi Korhonen
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 31)


Defect management practices are considered an important part of traditional software development. While embracing agile methods, software development organizations have realized that defects still do exist and they must be managed. Therefore defect management practices should be migrated as well, but current instructions for such a change are fragmented or incomplete. We studied three software development organizations to find out what are the main problems to consider in defect management when migrating from waterfall to agile. We identified five issues related to process, tools and metrics in a multi-site organization. This paper proposes action items to deal with these issues during the agile migration planning activities.


defect management agile adoption distributed development 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Schwaber, K., Beedle, M.: Agile software development with Scrum. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Herbsleb, J.D., Grinter, R.E.: Splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway’s law revisited. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 85–95 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Herbsleb, J.D., Mockus, A., Finholt, T.A., Grinter, R.E.: Distance, dependencies, and delay in a global collaboration. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 319–328. ACM Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jick, T.D.: Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in Action. Administrative Science Quarterly 24(4), 602–611 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sandusky, R.J., Gasser, L.: Negotiation and the coordination of information and activity in distributed software problem management. In: Proceedings of international ACM SIGGROUP conference on supporting group work, pp. 187–196. ACM Press, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Florac, W.: Software quality measurement a framework for counting problems and defects. Technical Report CMU/SEI-92-TR-22 (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mays, R.G., Jones, C.L., Holloway, G.J., Studinski, D.P.: Experiences with defect prevention. IBM Syst. J. 29(1), 4–32 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Daskalantonakis, M.K.: A Practical View of Software Measurement and Implementation Experiences Within Motorola. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 18(11), 998–1010 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quality Assurance Institute: Establishing a Software Defect Management Process. Research report number 8 (1995)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jäntti, M.: Difficulties in Establishing a defect management process: A Case Study. LNCS, pp. 142–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fenton, N.E., Pfleeger, S.L.: Software Metrics, A rigorous and practical approach. PWS Publishing Company (1997)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Larsson, A.: Making sense of collaboration: the challenge of thinking together in global design teams. In: Proceedings of the International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, pp. 153–160. ACM Press, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Korhonen, K., Salo, O.: Exploring Quality Metrics to support Defect Management Process in Multi Site Organization – a Case Study. In: Proceedings of ISSRE (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yin, R.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publishing, Thousand Oaks (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sidky, A., Arthur, J.: A disciplined approach to adopting agile practices: the agile adoption framework. In: Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering, pp. 203–216. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Misra, S., Kumar, U., Kumar, V., Grant, G.: The organizational changes required and the challenges involved in adopting agile methodologies in traditional software development organizations. In: Digital Information Management, pp. 25–28 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schatz, B., Abdelshafi, I.: Primavera Gets Agile: A Succesful Transition to Agile Development. IEEE Software 22, 36–42 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lawrence, R., Yslas, B.: Three-way cultural change: Introducing agile with two non-agile companies and a non-agile methodology. In: Proceedings of AGILE Conference (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cohn, M., Ford, D.: Introducing an Agile Process to an Organization. Computer 36(6), 74–78 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lindvall, M., Muthig, D., Dagnino, A., Wallin, C., Stupperich, M., Kiefer, D., May, J., Kahkonen, T.: Agile software development in large organizations. Computer 37(12), 26–34 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Poppendieck, M., Poppendieck, T.: Lean Software development. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Concas, G., DiFrancesco, M., Marchesi, M., Quaresima, R., Pinna, S.: An agile development process and its assessment using quantitative object-oriented metrics. In: XP 9th international conference, Ireland, pp. 83–93 (2008)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Catal, C., Diri, B.: A fault prediction model with limited fault data to improve test process. In: Profes 9th international conference, Italy, pp. 244–257 (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nerur, S., Mahapatra, R., Mangalaraj, G.: Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies. Communications of the ACM 48(5) (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kirsi Korhonen
    • 1
  1. 1.Nokia Siemens NetworksTampereFinland

Personalised recommendations