Agile Project Management Influence on

Software

Submitted To
Sir Muhammad Bilal
Submitted By
Muhammad Arslan BSEF14E037
Amjad Nawaz BSEF14E014
Asif Yar BSEF14E020

Date
17-04-2017
Department
Computer Science and Information
Technology
University Of Sargodha
 1. Introduction

In software industry, the change process is a complex set of tasks

largely based on specific knowledge and individual cultural background.
Software delays and failures are usually depends on selection of method of
development. Reliable development of dependable computer-based systems,
especially those for critical applications requires complete methodology to be
followed from starting to avoid from failure and economically loss. Over the
last decade, an increasing number of organizations have started software
development in a globally distributed environment.
Software engineering, as a discipline, confronts two key challenges that
separate it from other engineering disciplines. Software, a conceptual and
often intangible product, changes and evolves at a much higher rate than
other thing like building, car. While software is changeable, there is an
increased cost the later in a project lifecycle the change occurs. This is true
to a lesser degree in tangible products since measurable tests of the
requirements and design can be more readily applied. Recognition of this
fact has lead to the emergence of a set of Agile Methods that embrace
change and manage the related risks. Many such Agile Methods have been
introduced over the last decade, including eXtreme Programming (XP),
SCRUM, and Dynamic System Development Methodology (DSDM). While
these methods differ in their specifics, they share a common goal of enabling
teams to more rapidly respond to change. As changes are costly to
accommodate later in the project, the ability to respond rapidly to change
reduces project risks and their costs.
While Agile Methods are effective in some contexts, large and complex
software products often require systematic discipline with the requisite
process overhead to ensure success. Agile methods could work well for the
preproduction phase for fast iterations and prototyping. Agile allows large
level of improvements. The challenge for managers is to determine whether
an Agile Method is appropriate for a given set of project activities. All
methodologies have risks, and understanding those risks and finding ways to
monitor, mitigate, and manage those risks is an important aspect of software
project management. This paper examines the impact of Agile Methods on
software project management to illuminate some of the strengths and
weaknesses so project managers can make more informed decisions.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Agile and People Management

Agile development methodology is a conceptual framework for undertaking

any software engineering projects. In general agile methods attempt to
minimize risk and maximize productivity by developing software in short
iterations and deemphasizing work on interim work artifacts and it is people
oriented.

Here are some of the key characteristics of the agile methodology.

Deliver frequently.

More iterations.

Less defects.

Test frequently.

Collaborative approach

Maximum ROI

Agility, for a software development organization, is the power of

software to choose and react expeditiously and fittingly to various changes in
its surround and to the demands imposed by this surround. An agile process
is one that readily embraces and supports this degree of flexibility. So, it is
not simply about the size of the process or the speed of delivery; it is mainly
about flexibility. Previously, limit of different groups have independently
developed methods and practices to act to the changes they were
experiencing in software processing and development.

The differences between traditional methodologies and Agile Methodologies

relies on two main assumptions:

First, traditional methodologies which assume that customers do not know

their requirements, they need guidance from the developers. On the other
side Agile Methodologies assume that both customers and developers do not
have full understanding of requirements when the project starts.

Second, traditional methodologies suppose that customers ability to see

their future requirements is limited, and as such developers have to build in
more functionalities to meet these future needs, often leading to
overdesigned system. Agile Methodologies also emphasizes on simplicity.

A common way to contrast agile development with traditional project

methodologies and see software project success is to label projects as
agile vs. plan based. Traditional project management assumes that
accurate plans can be created for the entire project.
People and team management are based on various models such as
The five dysfunctions and Tuckmans model. All of these models require
that team members have a lot of interaction. The more persons there is on a
team, the more interaction is required and the more difficult it is to manage
such teams. In an Agile team, the project manager must define the
relationships between the roles to enable the effective coordination and
control of the project. The following rules should be applied when talking
about organizational structures:
Ensure that each member of the team reports to one and only one
person
Ensure that each person has no more than seven people reporting
directly to him or
However, individuals with different personalities are often expected to work
together as a cohesive team. Team efficiency is often dependent on the
interaction between team members and the coordination of the team leader.
Team efficiency is at its peak when team size is of 3 to 7 and it decreases
when team size goes up 9 members. Agile teams also work best in a
common workspace which enable team members to work in a shared
environment. This approach facilitates communication and collaboration and
has proved to an effective mean of increasing team productivity.
In a software project the objective is to deliver a project on time, on budget
and within the agreed quality level. Therefore software project managers
have the responsibility for the success of projects. Managers should be
skilled leaders and good at organizing problem-solving sessions that enable
maximizing collaboration across departments.
AGILE like many methods ... look great on paper but fail to work in reality
because they forget the human factor. Any paradigm, which has human
interaction at its heart, will fail if human psychology is not understood and
taken into account. The key areas of human nature which IT
development/project management methods have to take into account are no
different to those at the heart of most modern economic theories:
People will always put their own interests ahead of the interests
People are self-interested
Commercial production decisions are based on rational expectations
Cognitive studies tend to explain the state of mind of team members working
in a collaborative Environment. This is addressed by the Theory of Flow. Flow
(Optimal Experience), is the rational state in which a person in an activity is
totally absorbed, totally focus, have full engrossment, and eventually
acquires success in the process. The state of flow is attained when a person
has both higher than above challenge and skills in a specific activity. Not only
Flow is important to individuals but it can also contribute to team efficiency
and organizational goals. Flow generally leads to higher productivity,
innovation, and employee development. While it is not readily feasible to
identify the state of mind of employees within an Agile team, a psychological
evaluation may be required in order to determine how to achieve the optimal
experience for individuals in an Agile team.
Soft factors that can affect software team performance:
Team climate: shared perceptions and objectives to achieve organizational
goals.
Team diversity: The variation of team member skills, levels of experience,
qualifications, gender and race for instance.
Team innovation: new approaches to problem solving and value added
skills.
Team member competencies and characteristics: Technical and
personal competencies of people on team that impact familiarity and
collaboration.
Team leader behavior: Less micro-management approach and more
people management and a facilitator role.
Top management support: Commitment from management to the project
From this study, two key factors were found to be the most influential
on software team performance, namely: trust and effective communication.
The study is generalized and fails to identify the relationship between the
project management methodologies used with these soft factors. It may be
that different people factors influence the success of an Agile team.
Agile differs from traditional methods by putting much more emphasis
on team work, cooperation and self-organization. One of the key to the
success of Agile is trust, which needs to be present both between the leader
and the team and among the team members.
We should examine the people factors that influence both Agile and
Plan Based methods. It has been proven that people factors are the
most critical success factors for development
teams. There is enough evidence from previous research in psychology
of software teams that suggest that people factors have a direct
influence on the cost. In a software project, the key areas which are
impacted by people factors are:
Staffing: The right persons should be selected to work for the development
of a software project. In broad terms, it means that the customer should be
represented by skilled staffs who are collaborative, representative,
authorized, committed, and knowledgeable (CRACK). The characteristics of
developers within an agile team should include talent, skill, and
communication.
Culture: Agile requires a true cultural change from plan based approach, not
only a simple change in the processes used.
Values: One of the most neglected challenges in software development is
the consolidation and value of requirements from all stakeholders involved.
Communication: Agile requires more frequent and intense communication,
the more persons on a team the more challenging and problematic it
becomes to communicate effectively.
Managing Expectations: Software development teams often fail to
manage expectations and this can cause issues between the teams and the
customer.
Whilst the paper covers the major areas impacted by people factors in a
development team and even mention communication complexity and impact
of team size, the authors do not explore the ideal team size that can affect
the effectiveness of an Agile team. There is also limited reference to the
actual people factors that should be considered within Agile but more on the
areas impacted.
In a study published it was found that the increasing use of Agile approaches
and growing pressure to adopt Agile Management, contribute to the need for
human resource departments and project managers to address people
challenges. There is a need to identify the problems that the agile transition
may cause. A list of the most important people challenges in Agile was
proposed as follows: developer fear caused by transparency of skill
deficiencies, the need for developers to be a master of all trades, increased
reliance on social skills, a lack of business knowledge among developers, the
need to understand and learn values and principles of Agile, not just the
practices, lack of developer motivation to use Agile methods and the need
for Agile compliant performance evaluation.

3. References
[1] Sajjad Mahmood, Mahmood Niazi , Identifying the Challenges for
Managing Component-Based Development in Global Software
Development , computer, July 28-30,2015 p 1-3122.

[2] K. Beck. eXtreme Programming Explained. Addison-Wesley, 2000.

[3] SCRUM, its about Common Sense. http://www.controlchaos.com/about

[4] Michael Jackson ,Engineering and software engineering , computer, p 2-

3

[5] Jos Adson O. G. da Cunha, Fabio Q. B. da Silva, Francisco J. S.

Vasconcellos, Decision-Making in Software Project Management: A
Qualitative Case Study of a Private Organization, computer, June 2016 ,p 1-6

[6] K. Schwaber, Agile project management with Scrum. OReilly Media,Inc.,

2009.

[7] Manifesto for Agile Software Development,

http://www.agilemanifesto.org

[8] Williams, L. and A. Cockburn, Agile Software Development: It's about

Feedback and Change, Computer, June 2003, pp. 39-43.

[9] T. Dyb and T. Dingsyr, Empirical Studies of Agile Software

Development: A Systematic Review, Information and Software Technology,
vol. 50, nos. 910, 2008, pp. 2-4.

[10] Abrahamsson, P., J. Warsta, M.T. Siponen, and J. Ronkainen, New

Directions on Agile Methods: A Comparative Analysis, Proceedings of the
25th International Conference on Software Engineering, May 2003, pp. 244-
254.

[11] Boehm, B., Get Ready for Agile Methods, with Care, Computer, January
2002, pp. 64-69.

[12] Derbier, G., Agile Development in the Old Economy, Proceedings of

the Agile Development Conference, June 2003, pp. 125-131.

[13] The original wiki web site is http://c2.com/cgi-bin/wiki.

[14] Boehm, B. and R. Turner, Using Risk to Balance Agile and Plan-Driven
Methods, Computer, June 2003, pp. 57-66.
[15] Cohn, M. and D. Ford, Introducing an Agile Process to an Organization,
Computer, June 2003, pp. 74-78.

[16] DeMarco, T. and B. Boehm, The Agile Methods Fray, Computer , June
2002, pp. 90-92.

[17] Highsmith, J. and A. Cockburn, Agile Software Development, The

Business of Innovation, Computer, September 2001, pp. 120-

[18] J. Stapleton. DSDM Dynamic System Development Method. Addison-

Wesley, 1995.

[19] Paetsch, F., A. Eberlein, and F. Maurer, Requirements Engineering and

Agile Software Development, Proceedings of the 12th IEEE international
Workshops on Enabling
Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises, June 2003, pp. 308
313.

[20] D. Phillips. The Software Project Managers Handbook: Principles that

work at Work, IEEE Computer Society Press; June 1998.

[21] Thomas, S. An Agile Comparison,

http://www.balagan.org.uk/work/agile_comparison.htm.

[22] M. Aoyama, Web-based agile software development, IEEE Software15 (6)

(1998) p 5665.

[23] Springer Link (www.springerlink.com/)

[24] THE IMPACTS OF AGILE DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY USE ON PROJECT
SUCCESS: A CONTINGENCY VIEW By sJohn F. Tripp