Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of an Agile Maturity Model: Empirical Evidences for Agility Assessments

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Agile Methods (WBMA 2018)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 981))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Software process reference models (such as Capability Maturity Model Integration – CMMI–DEV) have been used for years for software process evaluation and improvement. However, when a team uses agile methods for software development, these models hinder sustaining agility in higher maturity levels. This is the reason why some agile maturity models have been proposed in the last years. Although there are some models suggested in literature, few studies actually evaluate these models with real teams. The objective of this study is thus to evaluate an agile maturity model – the Agile Compass – creating empirical results for agile teams in the process improvement field. We conducted this research with two field studies in two different agile teams: an ethnographic study and a focus group. Our findings confirmed the need for empirical validation of academically–proposed models. The Agile Compass was effective in creating a maturity picture for the teams, but both teams seemed to prefer a more “objective” evaluation.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. ISO/IEC - International Organization for Standardization/ International Electrical Committee. ISO/IEC 33001:2015. Information technology - Process assessment - Concepts and terminology (2015). https://www.iso.org/standard/54175.html. Accessed July 2018

  2. CMMI Product Team. CMMI for Development, Version 1.3 (CMU/SEI-2010-TR-033). Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University (2010). http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/10tr033.cfm. Accessed July 2018

  3. Beck, K., et al.: Manifesto for Agile Software Development (2001). http://agilemanifesto.org/. Accessed July 2018

  4. Paulk, M.: Extreme programming from a CMM perspective. IEEE Softw. 18(6), 19–26 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1109/52.965798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lukasiewicz, K., Miler, J.: Improving agility and discipline of software development with the Scrum and CMMI. IET Softw. 6(5), 416–422 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1049/ietsen.2011.0193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Schweigert, T., Nevalainen, R., Vohwinkel, D., Korsaa, M., Biro, M.: Agile maturity model: oxymoron or the next level of understanding. In: Mas, A., Mesquida, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2012. CCIS, vol. 290, pp. 289–294. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30439-2_34

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Schweigert, T., Vohwinkel, D., Korsaa, M., Nevalainen, R., Biro, M.: Agile maturity model: a synopsis as a first step to synthesis. In: McCaffery, F., O’Connor, R.V., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2013. CCIS, vol. 364, pp. 214–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39179-8_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Özcan-Top, Ö., Demirörs, O.: Assessment of agile maturity models: a multiple case study. In: Woronowicz, T., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2013. CCIS, vol. 349, pp. 130–141. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38833-0_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Özcan-Top, Ö., Demirörs, O.: A reference model for software agility assessment: agilitymod. In: Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2015. CCIS, vol. 526, pp. 145–158. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19860-6_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Leppänen, M.: A comparative analysis of agile maturity models. In: Pooley, R., et al. (eds.) Information Systems Development: Reflections, Challenges and New Directions, pp. 329–343. Springer, New York (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1951-5_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Fontana, R.M., Albuquerque, R., Luz, R., Moises, A.C., Malucelli, A., Reinehr, S.: Maturity models for agile software development: what are they? In: Larrucea, X., Santamaria, I., O’Connor, R.V., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2018. CCIS, vol. 896, pp. 3–14. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97925-0_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Fontana, R.M., Reinehr, S., Malucelli, A.: Agile compass: a tool for identifying maturity in agile software-development teams. IEEE Softw. 32(6), 20–23 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2015.135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Adalı, O.E., Özcan-Top, Ö., Demirörs, O.: Evaluation of agility assessment tools: a multiple case study. In: Clarke, P.M., O’Connor, R.V., Rout, T., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2016. CCIS, vol. 609, pp. 135–149. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38980-6_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Özcan-Top, Ö., Demirörs, O.: Assessing software agility: an exploratory case study. In: Mitasiunas, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2014. CCIS, vol. 477, pp. 202–213. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13036-1_18

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Gren, L., Torkar, R., Feldt, R.: The prospects of a quantitative measurement agility: a validation study on an agile maturity model. J. Syst. Softw. 107, 38–49 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.05.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Sidky, A., Arthur, J., Bohner, S.: A disciplined approach to adopting agile practices: the agile adoption framework. Innov. Syst. Softw. Eng. 3(3), 203–216 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-007-0026-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Bryman, A.: Social Research Methods, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, New York (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schwartzman, H.B.: Ethnography in Organizations. Qualitative Research Methods Series, vol. 27. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1993)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Venable, J., Pries-Heje, J., Baskerville, R.: A comprehensive framework for evaluation in design science research. In: Peffers, K., Rothenberger, M., Kuechler, B. (eds.) DESRIST 2012. LNCS, vol. 7286, pp. 423–438. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29863-9_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Krueger, R.A.: Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 5th edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Romain, G.: Characterizing the presence of agility in large-scale agile software development. Masters thesis presented in the Faculty of Computer Science of the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Buglione, L.: Light maturity models (LMM): an Agile application. In: Profes 2011: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Product Focused Software Development and Process Improvement (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Federal University of Paraná, UFPR, R. Dr. Alcides Vieira Arcoverde, 1225, Curitiba, PR, 81520-260, Brazil

    Adriana Corrêa Rodrigues & Rafaela Mantovani Fontana

Authors
  1. Adriana Corrêa Rodrigues
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rafaela Mantovani Fontana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rafaela Mantovani Fontana .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Federal University of Fronteira Sul, Chapecó, Santa Catarina, Brazil

    Graziela Simone Tonin

  2. Farfetch, Porto, Portugal

    Bernardo Estácio

  3. University of Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    Alfredo Goldman

  4. National Institute for Space Research, São José dos Campos, São Paulo, Brazil

    Eduardo Guerra

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Corrêa Rodrigues, A., Mantovani Fontana, R. (2019). Evaluation of an Agile Maturity Model: Empirical Evidences for Agility Assessments. In: Tonin, G., Estácio, B., Goldman, A., Guerra, E. (eds) Agile Methods. WBMA 2018. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 981. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14310-7_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14310-7_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-14309-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-14310-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation