Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
ATZ-Fachkongress

Chassis.tech plus 2024


4 Kongresse in einer Veranstaltung

Treffen Sie in München die Fachleute von Chassis, Lenkung, Bremsen sowie Reifen/Räder.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Is There Really a Conflict Between Privacy and Personalisation? Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2013 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

27. A Comparative Analysis of Agile Maturity Models

verfasst von : Mauri Leppänen

Erschienen in: Information Systems Development

Verlag: Springer New York

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Agility has increased in popularity in software development. It is believed to reduce time to market, improve product quality, and increase customer value. After some years from adoption, organizations start questioning how they are doing in the application of agile values, principles, and practices. Have they really obtained the benefits the agile approach promises? How could they improve their agile processes? For these kinds of situations, several agile maturity models have been suggested. This chapter makes a comparative analysis of eight agile maturity models, based on criteria such as purpose, domain, conceptual and theoretical backgrounds, approach, structure, use, and validation. We also discuss how the models could be further developed.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Can Relational DBMS Scale Up to the Cloud?
Nächstes Kapitel Simulation-Based Evaluation of Adaptive Applications
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
Abrahamsson P, Salo O, Ronkainen J, Warsta J (2002) Agile software development methods – review and analysis. VTT Publications 478
Anderson DJ (2005) Stretching agile to fit CMMI level 3 – the story of creating MSF for CMMI® Process Improvement at Microsoft Corporation. In: Proceedings of the agile development conference (ADC’05), pp 193–201
Baker S (2005) Formalizing agility: an agile organization’s journey towards CMMI accreditation. In: Proceedings of the agile development conference (ADC’05), pp185–192
Beck K (1999) Extreme programming explained: embrace change. Addison-Wesley, Reading
Becker J, Knackstedt R, Pöppelbuss P (2009) Developing maturity models for IT management – a procedure model and its application. Bus Inf Syst Eng 1(3):213–222CrossRef
Boehm B, Turner R (2003) Balancing agility and discipline. In: Balancing agility and discipline – a guide for the perplexed. Addison-Wesley, Boston
Bogsnes B (2009) Implementing beyond budgeting: unlocking the performance potential. Wiley, Hoboken
Bos E, Vriens C (2004) An agile CMM. In: Proc of the 4th conference on extreme programming and agile methods – XP/Agile Universe, pp 129–138
Chow T, Cao D-B (2008) A survey study of critical success factors in agile software projects. J Syst Softw 81(6):961–971CrossRef
Cohn M (2010) Succeeding with agile – software development using Scrum. Addison-Wesley, Upper Saddle River
Cohn M, Ford D (2003) Introducing an agile process to an organization. IEEE Softw 36(6):74–78
Conboy K (2009) Agility from first principles: reconstructing the concept of agility in information systems development. Inf Syst Res 20(3):329–354CrossRef
de Bruin T, Freeze R, Kulkani U, Rosemann M (2005) Understanding the main phases of developing a maturity assessment model. In: Proceedings of 16th Australasian conference on information systems
Doz Y, Kosonen M (2008) Fast strategy: how strategic agility will help you stay ahead of the game. Wharton School Publishing, Harlow
Fayad M, Laitinen M (1997) Process assessment considered wasteful. Commun ACM 40(11):125–128CrossRef
Fraser P, Moultrie J, Gregory M (2002) The use of maturity models/grids as a tool in assessing product development capability. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international engineering management conference, pp 244–249
Fritzsche M, Keil P (2007) Agile methods and CMMI: compatibility or conflict? e-Inf Softw Eng J 1(1):9–26
Galin D, Avrahami M (2006) Are CMM program investments beneficial? Analysing past studies. IEEE Softw 23(6):81–87CrossRef
Glazer H, Dalton J, Anderson D, Konrad M, Shrum S (2008) CMMI or agile: why not embrace both! Software engineering process management. Software Engineering Institute. CMU/SEI-2008-TN-003, Pittsburg
Herbsleb J, Goldenson D (1996) A system survey of CMM experience and results. In: Proceedings of 18th ICSE’96, pp 323–330
Highsmith J (2002) Agile software development ecosystems. Addison-Wesley, Boston
Humphrey WS (2005) PSP: a self-improvement process for software engineers. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh
Humphrey W, Snyder T, Willis R (1991) Software process improvement at Hughes Aircraft. IEEE Softw 8(4):11–23CrossRef
ISO/IEC 15504 (2008) International standard information technology – software process assessment: Part 1 – Part 7. International Organization for Standardization
Jakobsen C, Johnson K (2008) Mature agile with a twist of CMMI, In: Proceedings of agile 2008 conference, pp 212–217
Jiang J, Kleinb G, Hwange H-G, Haungc J, Hungc S-Y (2004) An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance. Inf Manage 41:279–288CrossRef
Kähkönen T, Abrahamsson P (2004) Achieving CMMI level 2 with enhanced extreme programming approach. In: Proceedings of the conference on product focused software process improvement, pp 378–392
Krebs W, Kroll P (2008) Using evaluation frameworks for quick reflections. Agile J (February 9)
Lami G, Falcini F (2009) Is ISO/IEC 15504 applicable to agile methods? In: Proceedings of XP 2009 conference, pp 130–135
Lohan G, Conboy K, Lang M (2010) Beyond budgeting and agile software development: a conceptual framework for the performance management of agile software development teams. In: Proceedings of ICIS 2010 conference
Lui K, Chan K (2005) A road map or implementing extreme programming. In: Proceedings of international software process workshop (SPW 2005), Beijing, pp 474–481
Lycett M, Macredie R, Patel C, Paul R (2003) Migrating agile methods to standardized development practice. IEEE Comput 36(6):79–85CrossRef
Marcal A, de Freitas B, Furtado Soares F, Furtado M, Maciel T, Belchior A (2008) Blending Scrum practices and CMMI project management process areas. Innov Syst Softw Eng 4:17–29CrossRef
McMichael B, Lombardi M (2007) ISO 2001 and agile development. In: Proceedings of AGILE 2007 conference, pp 262–265
Mettler T, Rohner P (2009) Situational maturity models as instrumental artifacts for organizational design. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on design science research in information systems and technology (DESTRIST’09)
Misra SC, Kumar V, Kumar U (2009) Identifying some important success factors in adopting agile software development practices. J Syst Softw 82(11):1869–1890CrossRef
Nawrocki J, Walter B, Wojciechowski A (2001) Towards the maturity model for extreme programming. In: Proceedings of 27th Euromicro conference, Los Alamitos, pp 233–239
Nawrocki J, Walter B, Wojciechowski A (2006) Comparison of CMM level 2 and eXtreme programming. In: Proceedings of software quality (ECSQ 2002), LNCS 2349, pp 288–297
Packlick J (2007) The agile maturity map: a goal oriented approach to agile improvement, In: Proceedings of AGILE 2007 conference, pp 266–271
Patel C, Ramachandran M (2009) Agile maturity model (AMM): a software process improvement framework of agile software development practices. Int J Softw Eng 2(1):3–28
Paulk M (2001) Extreme programming from a CMM perspective. IEEE Softw 18(6):19–26CrossRef
Paulk M, Curtis B, Chrissis M, Weber C (1993) The capability maturity model for software, version 1.1 (No. CMU/SEI-93-TR-24). Software Engineering Institute
Petterson F, Ivarsson M, Gorschek T, Öhman P (2008) A practitioner’s guide to light weight software process assessment and improvement planning. J Syst Softw 81(6):972–995CrossRef
Pikkarainen M, Mäntyniemi A (2006) An approach for using CMMI in agile software development assessments: experiences from three case studies. In: Proceedings of SPICE 2006 conference, Luxenburg
Poon P, Wagner C (2001) Critical success factors revisited: success and failure cases of information systems for senior executives. Decis Support Syst 30(4):393–418CrossRef
Poppendijk M, Poppendijk T (2003) Lean software development – an agile toolkit. Addison-Wesley, Boston
Procaccino J, June M, Steven J (2006) Defining and contributing to software development success. Commun ACM 49(8):79–83CrossRef
Qumer A, Henderson-Sellers B (2006) Comparative evaluation of XP and Scrum using the 4D analytical tool (4-DAT). In: Irani Z et al (eds) Proceedings of the European and Mediterranean conference on information systems 2006 (EMCIS2006)
Qumer A, Henderson-Sellers B (2008) A framework to support the evaluation, adoption, and improvement of agile methods in practice. J Syst Softw 81(11):1899–1919CrossRef
Rohunen A, Rodriguez P, Kuvaja P, Krzanik L, Markkula J (2010) Approaches to agile adoption in large settings: comparison of the results from a literature analysis and an industrial inventory. In: Proceedings of PROFES 2010 conference, Springer LNCS 6156, pp 77–91
Salo O, Abrahamsson P (2007) An iterative improvement process for agile software development. Softw Proc Improv Pract 12:81–100CrossRef
Schwaber K (2004) Agile project management with Scrum. Microsoft Press, Washington, DC
Shalloway A, Beaver G, Trott J (2009) Lean-agile software development: achieving enterprise agility. Addison-Wesley, Upper Saddle River
Sidky A, Arthur J, Bohner S (2007) A disciplined approach to adopting agile practice: the agile adoption framework. Innov Syst Softw Eng 3(3):203–216CrossRef
Simpson J, Weiner E (1989) The Oxford English dictionary. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Stålhane T, Hanssen G (2008) The application of ISO 2001 to agile software development. In: Proceedings of conference on product focused software process improvement, pp 371–385
Sutherland J, Jakobsen C, Johnson K (2007) CMMI and Scrum – a magic potion for code warriors. In: Proceedings of agile 2007 conference
Turner R, Jain A (2002) Agile meets CMMI: culture clash or common cause? In: Extreme programming and agile methods – XP/Agile Universe 2002, Springer LNCS 2418, pp 60–69
Williams L, Layman L, Krebs W (2004) Extreme programming evaluation framework for object-oriented languages, version 1.4. North Carolina State University Department of Computer Science, TR-2004-18
Metadaten
Titel
A Comparative Analysis of Agile Maturity Models
verfasst von
Mauri Leppänen
Copyright-Jahr
2013
Verlag
Springer New York
Buch
Information Systems Development

Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4950-8

Electronic ISBN: 978-1-4614-4951-5

Copyright-Jahr: 2013

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4951-5_27

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise