Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analytical evaluation of agile success factors influencing quality in software industry

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To have the software development process a fruitful one we have to consider the critical factors of success of agile development. Any organisation is expected to deliver the end product timely with required and on agreed upon terms which is many a times beaten by the extended time taken to complete the software projects or also leading to unexpected increase in the budget of the projects. So today’s development processes embed agile implementation for the accelerating growth of the company, organisation with fast competition of their work. The conventional approach of software systems succumbs towards the ever changing and much needed twist of the “Agile process” to be implemented. Agile focuses on collaborative work for the lifecycle of the project to continue iteratively with anticipating changes and introducing more flexibility than prior traditional approaches. Small sprints remain utilized which are mandatory for effective item conveyance. Conventional programming advancement forms are very little proficient to deal with the fast change in necessities. In spite of the upsides of Agile, feedback on deft approach expresses that it neglects to focus on building and configuration issues and subsequently will undoubtedly create little outline decisions. Agile programming improvement has quickly picked up a great deal of enthusiasm for the field of programming designing. Agile programming development, in spite of its curiosity, is a critical area of research inside programming building discipline. Logical research is yet rare, there has been minimal nitty gritty revealing of the use, entrance and achievement of light-footed systems in customary, proficient programming advancement organisations. In this paper we will evaluate the agile success factors for the product outcomes. The manuscript takes the approach for deciding best agile success factors influencing quality in software industry using analytic network process (ANP). This paper applies ANP to conclude the best way out using nine criteria namely Agile implementation, root cause analysis, mutation testing, cycle time, test and learn approach, continuous integration, process action, IT governance strategy, organisational change, effective risk mitigation, feedback, tangible outcomes, and two alternatives in the form Scrum and Kanban agile framework. The projected approach was tested in a organisation application in software reliability, software development environment and this paper evaluates its effectiveness by giving the weightage to the factor by realising the precise objective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig 1
Fig 2
Fig 3
Fig 4
Fig 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alqudah M, Razali R (2017) A comparison of scrum and Kanban for identifying their selection factors, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEEI.2017.8312434

  • Cho YH, Mccullough BF, Weissmann J (1996) Considerations on finite-element method application in pavement structural analysis. Transportation Research Record 1539. Transportation Research Board,Washington, DC, pp 96–101

  • Chung SA, Kim GM (2003) Performance effects of partnership between manufacturers and suppliers for new product development: the supplier's standpoint. Res Policy 32(4):587–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fowler M, Highsmith J (2000) The agile manifesto, vol 9 

  • Gencer C, Gürpinar D (2007) Analytic network process in supplier selection: a case study in an electronic firm. Appl Math Model 31:2475–2486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2006.10.002

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta V, Kapur PK, Kumar D (2016) Modeling and measuring code smells in enterprise applications using TISM and 2 assessment. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 7(3):332–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hämäläinen RAND, Seppäläinen T (1986) The analytic network process in energy policy planning. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 20(6):399–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kravchenko T, Seredenko N (2011) Decision-making with the modeling of problem situations using the analytic network hierarchy process. Int J Anal Hierarchy Process 3(1):28–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar V, Kapur PK, Taneja N, Sahni R (2017) On allocation of resources during testing phase incorporating flexible software reliability growth model with testing effort under dynamic environment. Int J Oper Res 30(4):523–539

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lee J, Kim S (2000) Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection. Comput Oper Res 27(4):367–382

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Meade L, Presley A (2002). R&D project selection using the analytic network process. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 49(1):59–66. https://doi.org/10.1109/17.985748. 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meredith S, Francis D (2000) Journey towards agility: the agile wheel explored. TQM Mag 12(2):137–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drzal LT et al (2005) Natural Fibers, Biopolymer and Biocomposites. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 20–21

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Prince J, Kay JM (2003) Combining lean and agile characteristics: creation of virtual groups by enhanced production flow analysis. Int J Prod Econ 85:305–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00118-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL (1996) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation, 2nd edn. RWS Publications, Pittsburg, PA

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T (2004) Fundamentals of the analytic network process—dependence and feedback in decision-making with a single network. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 13(2):129–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2013) The analytic network process. In: Decision making with the analytic network process. International series in operations research & management science, vol 195. Springer, Boston, MA  

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T, Vargas L (1979) Estimating technological coefficients by the analytic hierarchy process. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 13(6):333–336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava A, Kapur PK, Mehrotra D (2017) Modelling fault detection with change-point in agile software development environment. In: Infocom technologies and unmanned systems (trends and future directions) (ICTUS), pp 303–308. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTUS.2017.8286023

  • Srivastava A, Kapur PK, Mehrotra D, Majumdar R (2019) Modelling fault detection using srgm in agile environment and ranking of models. J Cases Inf 21(2):1–20. https://doi.org/10.4018/jcit.2019040101 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuzkaya UR, Önüt S (2008) A fuzzy analytic network process based approach to transportation-mode selection between Turkey and Germany: a case study. Inf Sci 178:3133–3146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.03.0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu WW, Lee Y-T (2007) Developing global managers' competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Syst Appl 32:499–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2005.12.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynstra F, Ten Pierick E (2000) Managing supplier involvement in new product development: a portfolio approach. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 6(1):49–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yurdakul M (2003) Measuring long-term performance of a manufacturing firm using the Analytic Network Process (ANP) approach. Int J Prod Res 41:2501–2529. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020754031000088183

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Amity School of Engineering and Technology, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

    Abhishek Srivastava & Deepti Mehrotra

  2. Amity Center for Interdisciplinary Research, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

    P. K. Kapur

  3. Department of Operational Research, Faculty of Mathematical Sciences, University of Delhi, New Delhi, India

    Anu G. Aggarwal

Authors
  1. Abhishek Srivastava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Deepti Mehrotra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. K. Kapur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anu G. Aggarwal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abhishek Srivastava.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Srivastava, A., Mehrotra, D., Kapur, P.K. et al. Analytical evaluation of agile success factors influencing quality in software industry. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 11 (Suppl 2), 247–257 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-00966-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-00966-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation