research-article

Modeling dynamics in agile software development

Authors:

Balasubramaniam Ramesh,

Tarek Abdel-HamidAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems (TMIS), Volume 1, Issue 1

Article No.: 5, Pages 1 - 26

https://doi.org/10.1145/1877725.1877730

Published: 10 December 2010 Publication History

Abstract

Changes in the business environment such as turbulent market forces, rapidly evolving system requirements, and advances in technology demand agility in the development of software systems. Though agile approaches have received wide attention, empirical research that evaluates their effectiveness and appropriateness is scarce. Further, research to-date has investigated individual practices in isolation rather than as an integrated system. Addressing these concerns, we develop a system dynamics simulation model that considers the complex interdependencies among the variety of practices used in agile development. The model is developed on the basis of an extensive review of the literature as well as quantitative and qualitative data collected from real projects in nine organizations. We present the structure of the model focusing on essential agile practices. The validity of the model is established based on extensive structural and behavioral validation tests. Insights gained from experimentation with the model answer important questions faced by development teams in implementing two unique practices used in agile development. The results suggest that due to refactoring, the cost of implementing changes to a system varies cyclically and increases during later phases of development. Delays in refactoring also increase costs and decrease development productivity. Also, the simulation shows that pair programming helps complete more tasks and at a lower cost. The systems dynamics model developed in this research can be used as a tool by IS organizations to understand and analyze the impacts of various agile development practices and project management strategies.

Supplementary Material

Cao Appendix (a5-cao-apndx.pdf)

Online appendix to modeling dynamics in agile software development on article 5.

Download
673.21 KB

References

[1]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K. 1989. The dynamics of software project staffing: A system dynamics based simulation approach. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 15, 109--119.

Digital Library

[2]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K. 1990. Investigating the cost/schedule trade-off in software development. IEEE Softw. 7, 97--105.

Digital Library

[3]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K. 1993a. Adapting, correcting, and perfecting software estimates: A maintenance metaphor. IEEE Comput. 26, 20--29.

Digital Library

[4]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K. 1993b. Modeling the dynamics of software reuse: An integrating system dynamics perspective. In Proceedings of the 6^th Workshop on Institutionalizing Software Reuse.

[5]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K. and Leidy, F. H. 1991. An expert simulator for allocating the quality assurance effort in software development. Simul. 56, 233--240.

[6]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K. and Madnick, S. E. 1983. The dynamics of software project scheduling. Comm. ACM 26, 340--346.

Digital Library

[7]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K. and Madnick, S. E. 1991. Software Project Dynamics: An Integrated Approach. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Digital Library

[8]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K., Sengupta, K., and Hardebeck, M. J. 1994. The effect of reward structures on allocating shared staff resources among interdependent software projects: An experimental investigation. IEEE Trans. Engin. Manag. 41, 115--125.

[9]

Abdel-Hamid, T. K., Sengupta, K., and Ronan, D. 1993. Software project control: An experimental investigation of judgment with fallible information. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 19, 603--612.

Digital Library

[10]

Alshayeb, M. and Li, W. 2005. An empirical study of system design instability metric and design evolution in an agile software process. J. Syst. Softw. 74, 269--274.

Digital Library

[11]

Arnold, R. S. 1986. An introduction to software restructuring. In Tutorial on Software Restructuring, R. S. Arnold Ed., IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA.

[12]

Barlas, Y. 1989. Multiple test for validation of system dynamics type of simulation models. Euro. J. Oper. Res. 42, 59--87.

[13]

Basili, V. R. and Weiss, D. M. 1984. A methodology for collecting valid software engineering data. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 10, 728--737.

Digital Library

[14]

Beck, K. 1994. Simple smalltalk testing: With patterns. Smalltalk Rep. 4.

[15]

Beck, K. 2000. Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change. Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA.

Digital Library

[16]

Beck, K. 2003. Test Driven Development: By Example. Addison-Wesley Professional.

Digital Library

[17]

Beck, K. and Gamma, E. 1998. Test infected: Programmers love writing tests. Java Rep. 3, 37--50.

[18]

Berry, D. M. 2002. The inevitable pain of software development, including of extreme programming, caused by requirements volatility. In Proceedings of the International Workshop On Time-Constrained Requirements.

[19]

Boehm, B. 1981. Software Engineering Economics. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Digital Library

[20]

Boehm, B. 2002. Get ready for agile methods, with care. IEEE Comput. 35, 64--69.

Digital Library

[21]

Boehm, B. and Turner, R. 2004. Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed. Addison Wesley.

Digital Library

[22]

Cangussu, J. W. 2004. A software test process stochastic control model based on cmm characterization. Softw. Process. Improv. Pract. 9, 55--66.

[23]

Cao, L., Mohan, K., Xu, P., and Ramesh, B. 2009. A framework for adapting agile development methodologies. Euro. J. Inform. Syst. 18, 332--343.

[24]

Choi, S. J. and Scacchi, W. 2001. Modeling and simulating software acquisition process architectures. J. Syst. Softw. 59, 343--354.

[25]

Cunningham, W. 1992. The Wycash portfolio management system. In Proceedings of the Conference on Object Oriented Programming Systems Languages and Applications (OOPSLA). ACM Press, New York.

Digital Library

[26]

Curtis, B., Krasner, H., and Iscoe, N. 1988. A field study of the software design process for large systems. Comm. ACM 31, 1268--1287.

Digital Library

[27]

Dutta, A. and Roy, R. 2005. Offshore outsourcing: A dynamic causal model of counteracting forces. J. Manag. Inform. Syst. 22, 15--35.

Digital Library

[28]

Dutta, A. and Roy, R. 2008. Dynamics of organizational information security. Syst. Dynam. Rev. 24, 349--375.

[29]

Elssamadisy, A. and Schalloil, G. 2002. Recognizing and responding to ‘bad smells’ in xp. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering.

Digital Library

[30]

Erdogmus, H. and Williams, L. 2003. The economics of software development by pair programmers. Engin. Econom. 48, 283--319.

[31]

Erickson, J., Lyytinen, K., and Siau, K. 2005. Agile modeling, agile software development, and extreme programming: The state of research. J. Data. Manag. 16, 88--99.

[32]

Fitzgerald, B., Hartnett, G., and Conboy, K. 2006. Customizing agile methods to software practices at Intel Shannon. Euro. J. Inform. Syst. 15, 200--213.

Digital Library

[33]

Forrester, J. W. 1961. Industrial Dynamics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

[34]

Forrester, J. W. and Senge, P. M. 1980. Tests for building confidence in system dynamics models. TIMS Stud. Manag. Sci. 14, 209--228.

[35]

Fowler, M. 1999. Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code. Addison-Wesley.

Digital Library

[36]

George, B. and Williams, L. 2002. An initial investigation of test-driven development in industry. In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing.

Digital Library

[37]

Glass, R. 2004. Matching methodology to problem domain. Comm. ACM 47, 19--21.

Digital Library

[38]

Gorts, S. 2004. Refactoring in the large. http://www.refactoring.be/thumbnails/large/large.html

[39]

Grenning, J. 2001. Launching xp at a process-intensive company. IEEE Softw. 18, 3--9.

Digital Library

[40]

Harrison, B. 2003. A study of extreme programming in a large company. http://www.agilealliance.org/articles/articles/ALR-2003-039-paper.pdf

[41]

Highsmith, J. and Cockburn, A. 2001. Agile software development: The business of innovation. IEEE Comput. 34, 120--122.

Digital Library

[42]

Hodgetts, P. 2004. Refactoring the development process: Experiences with the incremental adoption of agile practices. In Proceedings of the IEEE Agile Development Conference.

Digital Library

[43]

Höst, M., Regnell, B., Dag, J. N. O., Nedstam, J., and Nyberg, C. 2001. Exploring bottlenecks in market-driven requirements management processes with discrete event simulation. J. Syst. Softw. 59, 323--332.

[44]

Jeffries, R., Anderson, A., and Hendrickson, C. 2001. Extreme Programming Installed. Addison- Wesley, Boston, MA.

Digital Library

[45]

Karlström, D. 2002. Introducing extreme programming—An experience report. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on eXtreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering (XP'02).

[46]

Kataoka, Y., Imai, T., Andou, H., and Fukaya, T. 2002. A quantitative evaluation of maintainability enhancement by refactoring. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software Maintenance. 576--585.

Digital Library

[47]

Li, W. and Henry, S. 1993. Object-Oriented metrics that predict maintainability. J. Syst. Softw. 23, 111--122.

Digital Library

[48]

Lientz, B. P., Swanson, E. B., and Tompkins, G. E. 1978. Characteristics of application software maintenance. Comm. ACM 21, 466--471.

Digital Library

[49]

Madachy, R. 2007 Software Process Dynamics. Wiley-IEEE Press, Los Alamitos, CA.

[50]

Martin, R. C. 2000. Extreme programming development through dialog. IEEE Softw. 17, 12--{} 13.

Digital Library

[51]

Mens, T. and Tourwe, T. 2004. A survey of software refactoring. IEEE Trans. Softw. Engin. 30, 126--139.

Digital Library

[52]

Nosek, J. T. 1998. The case for collaborative programming. Comm. ACM 41, 105--108.

Digital Library

[53]

Opdyke, W. F. 1992. Refactoring: A program restructuring aid in designing object-oriented application frameworks. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

[54]

Opdyke, W. F. 1995. Refactoring object-oriented software to support evolution and reuse. In Proceedings of the 7^th Annual Workshop on Institutionalizing Software Reuse.

[55]

Parrish, A., Smith, R., Hale, D., and Hale, J. 2004. A field study of developer pairs: Productivity impacts and implications. IEEE Softw. 21, 76--79.

Digital Library

[56]

Peters, P. and Jarke, M. 1996. Simulating the impact of information flows in networked organizations. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS).

[57]

Ramesh, B., Cao, L., and Baskerville, R. 2010. Agile requirements engineering practices and challenges: An empirical study. Inform. Syst. J. 20, 5, 449--480.

[58]

Roberts, D. 1999. Practical analysis for refactoring. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.

Digital Library

[59]

Roehling, S. T., Collofello, J. S., Hermann, B. G., and Smith-Daniels, D. E. 2000. System dynamics modeling applied to software outsourcing decision support. Softw. Process. Improv. Pract. 5.

[60]

Rumpe, B. and Schroeder, A. 2002. Quantitative survey on extreme programming project. In Proceedings of the 3^rd International Conference on eXtreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering. 95--100.

[61]

Rus, I., Collofello, J., and Lakey, P. 1999. Software process simulation for reliability management. J. Syst. Softw. 46, 173--182.

[62]

Sengupta, K. and Abdel-Hamid, T. K. 1996. The impact of unreliable information on the management of software projects: A dynamic decision perspective. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. 26, 177--189.

Digital Library

[63]

Sengupta, K., Abdel-Hamid, T. K., and Bosley, M. 1999. Coping with staffing delays in software project management: An experimental investigation. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. A29, 77--91.

Digital Library

[64]

Shore, J. 2004. Continuous design. IEEE Comput. 21, 20--22.

Digital Library

[65]

Stallinger, F. and Grünbacher, P. 2001. System dynamics modeling and simulation of collaborative requirements engineering. J. Syst. Softw. 59, 311--321.

[66]

Stark, G. E., Oman, P., Skillicorn, A., and Ameele, A. 1999. An examination of the effects of requirements changes on software maintenance releases. J. Softw. Maint. Res. Pract. 11, 293--309.

Digital Library

[67]

Sterman, J. D. 2000. Business Dynamics: System Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. McGraw-Hill.

Digital Library

[68]

Stroulia, E. and Leitch, R. 2003. Understanding the economics of refactoring. In Proceedings of the 5^th ICSE Workshop on Economics-Driven Software Engineering Research.

[69]

Swanson, E. B. 1976. The dimensions of maintenance. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Software Engineering. 492--497.

Digital Library

[70]

West, D., Grant, T., Gerush, M., and D'Silva, D. 2010. Agile Development: Mainstream Adoption Has Changed Agility. Forrester Research.

[71]

Whiler, O. 2003. Refactoring. Methods & Tools Spring.

[72]

Williams, L. 2001. Integrating pair programming into a software development process. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training.

Digital Library

[73]

Williams, L. and Kessler, R. R. 2000. The effects of “pair-pressure” and “pair-learning” on software engineering education. In Proceedings of the 13th Conference of Software Engineering Education and Training.

Digital Library

[74]

Williams, L., Kessler, R. R., Cunningham, W., and Jeffries, R. 2000. Strengthening the case for pair-programming. IEEE Softw. 17, 19--25.

Digital Library

Cited By

Restrepo-Tamayo LGasca-Hurtado GValencia-Calvo J(2024)Characterizing Social and Human Factors in Software Development Team Productivity: A System Dynamics ApproachIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.338850512(59739-59755)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3388505
Liu BZhang HDong LWang ZLi S(2024)Metrics for software process simulation modelingJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.2676Online publication date: 11-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.2676
Li YZhang HLiu BDong LGong HRong G(2024)Verification and validation of software process simulation modelsJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.261236:6Online publication date: 5-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/smr.2612
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Modeling dynamics in agile software development
1. Computing methodologies
  1. Modeling and simulation

Recommendations

Modeling dynamics of agile software development
OOPSLA '04: Companion to the 19th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications

The primary objective of my dissertation is to develop an integrative view of agile software development to enhance our understanding and make predictions about the agile process. By modeling the dynamics of agile software development process, the ...
The Combination of Agile and Lean in Software Development: An Experience Report Analysis
AGILE '11: Proceedings of the 2011 Agile Conference

There has been a noticeable focus shift from agile methods such as extreme Programming (XP) and Scrum to lean software development in the last several years, which is indicated as â from agile to leanâ . However, the reality may not be as simple or ...
Stakeholder Involvement in Agile Software Development
NordiCHI '16: Proceedings of the 9th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction

Agile software development processes (Agile), such as Scrum, DSDM, XP and Kanban, have become de facto standards for software development practice. Scrum, the most commonly used process, focuses on delivering functioning software early and continuously, ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems

ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems Volume 1, Issue 1

December 2010

135 pages

ISSN:2158-656X

EISSN:2158-6578

DOI:10.1145/1877725

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2010 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 10 December 2010

Accepted: 01 September 2010

Revised: 01 September 2010

Received: 01 February 2010

Published in TMIS Volume 1, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

40
Total Citations
View Citations
3,281
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)77
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7

Reflects downloads up to 05 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Restrepo-Tamayo LGasca-Hurtado GValencia-Calvo J(2024)Characterizing Social and Human Factors in Software Development Team Productivity: A System Dynamics ApproachIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2024.338850512(59739-59755)Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3388505
Liu BZhang HDong LWang ZLi S(2024)Metrics for software process simulation modelingJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.2676Online publication date: 11-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.1002/smr.2676
Li YZhang HLiu BDong LGong HRong G(2024)Verification and validation of software process simulation modelsJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.261236:6Online publication date: 5-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/smr.2612
Amaral Ade Franco Rosa F(2023)Method for Assessing the Potential Impact of Changes in Software Requirements of Agile Methodologies Based ProjectsHuman Interface and the Management of Information10.1007/978-3-031-35129-7_1(3-21)Online publication date: 23-Jul-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-35129-7_1
Cao L(2022)Estimating Efforts for Various Activities in Agile Software Development: An Empirical StudyIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2022.319692310(83311-83321)Online publication date: 2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3196923
Mumtaz MAhmad NUsman Ashraf MAlghamdi ABahaddad AAlmarhabi K(2022)Iteration Causes, Impact, and Timing in Software Development Lifecycle: An SLRIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2022.318270310(65355-65375)Online publication date: 2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3182703
Khatun MHiekata KTakahashi YOkada I(2022)Design and management of software development projects under rework uncertainty: a study using system dynamicsJournal of Decision Systems10.1080/12460125.2021.202325732:2(265-288)Online publication date: 7-Jan-2022
https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2021.2023257
Franco EHirama KArmenia Sdos Santos J(2022)A systems interpretation of the software evolution laws and their impact on technical debt management and software maintainabilitySoftware Quality Journal10.1007/s11219-022-09600-631:1(179-209)Online publication date: 6-Sep-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s11219-022-09600-6
Restrepo-Tamayo LGasca-Hurtado GMachuca-Villegas LMorillo-Puente S(2022)Productivity of Software Development Teams Based on Social and Human Factors: A Dynamic Conceptual ModelInformation Systems and Technologies10.1007/978-3-031-04829-6_2(13-23)Online publication date: 11-May-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04829-6_2
Ichimura KShimoda A(2021)Estimation of the Effect of Improving Communication in Collaborative Projects with High Uncertainty based on Systems Approach2021 10th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI)10.1109/IIAI-AAI53430.2021.00132(749-754)Online publication date: Jul-2021
https://doi.org/10.1109/IIAI-AAI53430.2021.00132
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents