‘Lots done, more to do’: the current state of agile systems development research

European Journal of Information Systems, Aug 2009

Pekka Abrahamsson, Kieran Conboy, Xiaofeng Wang

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Fejis.2009.27.pdf

‘Lots done, more to do’: the current state of agile systems development research

European Journal of Information Systems 'Lots done, more to do': the current state of agile systems development research Pekka Abrahamsson VTT Finland Kieran Conboy NUI Galway Ireland Xiaofeng Wang Lero Ireland Agile systems development methods emerged as a response to the inability of previous plan-driven approaches to handle rapidly changing environments (Highsmith, 2002). Originating from the so-called 'light-weight' methods and promoted through the publication of the Agile Manifesto (2001), the agile method family have become highly prevalent in recent years. Meantime, agile system development research has gained momentum, as is evident from the increasing number of dedicated journal special issues, conferences, conference tracks and workshops. However, practitioners and consultants have largely driven the creation and dissemination of these methods. Agile research has lagged behind practice, as is often the case with new and emerging phenomena in Information Systems Development (ISD). - Current shortcomings in agile systems development research Despite the fact that existing agile system development research should be lauded in that it is very applied and relevant to industry, the current body of knowledge has several shortcomings. Conboy (2009) and Dyba˚ & Dings yr, 2008 conducted two studies in particular which surface issues including clarity regarding what constitutes agility, more research required into the adaptability and extension of agile methods, a deeper understanding of how agile methods are deployed in practice, and an overall necessity to improve the level of rigour in agile system development research. Before introducing the papers in this special issue, it is worth summarising these issues, so one can then get an appreciation for the contribution the special issue papers add to the current body of knowledge. The need for a better understanding of what constitutes ‘agility’: Any good concept needs a strong underlying logic and rationale that serves as a ‘theoretical glue’ and binds all of the factors together (Whetten, 1989). However, the current body of agile method knowledge suffers from a lack of clarity as to what constitutes agility. It seems almost every piece of research adopts a unique interpretation of agility. This is to be expected to some degree; Lyytinen & Rose (2006) argue that, in the context of ISD, agility as a concept needs to be multifaceted and contextual, and that agility is achieved through various different means depending on the project environment. Based on this argument, every organisation needs to adopt an appropriate interpretation of what agility means to them, and in some cases, this may be unique as opposed to expropriating a single commercial version, such as XP or Scrum. While a universal interpretation is not promising, in order to significantly advance this area of research, it is important to have some solid platform on which to build a cohesive body of knowledge. Work is needed that at least frames acceptable agility concepts in known general contexts. The need to extend the applicability of agile methods: Agile methods are sometimes seen as largely restricted to small, co-located development teams, non-critical system development, with on demand access to developers, and other such constraints (e.g. Stephens & Rosenberg, 2003). While this view has been contradicted by some, Conboy (2009) suggests that this may not be the case, pointing to the significant volume of research attempting to rebuild and tailor these methods so they can operate in other environments (e.g. Bowers et al., 2002; Crispin & House, 2003; Stotts et al., 2003; Cao et al., 2004; Kahkonen, 2004; Lindvall et al., 2004). It reflects a persistent demand on extending the applicability of agile methods in broader contexts. The need for a better understanding of agile methods beyond the adoption stage: One of the main focuses of agile method research has been the introduction and adoption of agile methods (Dyba˚ & Dings yr, 2008). In contrast, the studies of issues associated with post-adoption use of agile methods are much less in number, even though there is increasing need to have a better understanding of agile methods in use as many organisations have completed adoption stage and agile methods start to become well-established processes of these organisations. Specific needs of organisations and human nature inevitably lead to diverse interpretations and implementations of a method, which in turn lead to different, sometimes surprising, effects and consequences of use of agile methods and associated practices. The need for more rigorous studies: Dyba˚ & Dings yr’s, 2008 systematic review of 33 primary empirical studies of agile software development (up to and including 2005) reveals a need for more rigorous studies in agile research. They have discovered that the research methods used in these studies were not described well in general; bias, validity, and reliability issues (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Fejis.2009.27.pdf

Pekka Abrahamsson, Kieran Conboy, Xiaofeng Wang. ‘Lots done, more to do’: the current state of agile systems development research, European Journal of Information Systems, 2009, pp. 281-284, Volume 18, Issue 4, DOI: 10.1057/ejis.2009.27