‘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)