ArticlePDF Available

Risk mitigation techniques in agile development processes

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

The main purpose of agile development methods is to reduce risks leading to a more successful and effective information system. In fact, analysing priorities, finding and identifying risks are important activities in all development approaches, including Agile development. However, some studies seek to assess risk management based on agile global software development (GSD) and provide mitigation measures to address specific risks. The risk mitigation technique for good development for sustainable development is expected to be designed to achieve time efficiency improvements to obtain greater resources at lower cost and thereby gain and maintain a competitive advantage.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2019
1123
Risk Mitigation Techniques in Agile
Development Processes
Muhammad Akil Rafeek#1, Adila Firdaus Arbain#2, Endah Sudarmilah*3
# Information Technology Department, Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology, Universiti
Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Parit Raja, Johor.
Address Including Country Name
makil399@gmail.com
adila@uthm.edu.my
* Informatics Department Faculty of Communication and Informatic, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta
Jawa Tengah, Indonesia.
Endah.Sudarmilah@ums.ac.id
Abstract The main purpose of agile development
methods is to reduce risks leading to a more successful
and effective information system. In fact, analysing
priorities, finding and identifying risks are important
activities in all development approaches, including
Agile development. However, some studies seek to
assess risk management based on agile global software
development (GSD) and provide mitigation measures
to address specific risks. The risk mitigation technique
for good development for sustainable development is
expected to be designed to achieve time efficiency
improvements to obtain greater resources at lower cost
and thereby gain and maintain a competitive
advantage.
Keywords Agile; Risks; Risk Mitigation; Global
Software Development
1. Introduction
Agile is a group of software development
methods that are based on iterative and incremental
development [1]. It is widely known for its flexible
approach in managing the requirement volatility and
emphasis on extensive collaboration between
customers and developers [2]. Agile practices are
based on the philosophy of close, frequent and
collocated collaborations [3]. There are few methods
in Agile such as Scrum, XP, FDD and others. All
Agile methodologies major characteristic are
adaptive planning, iterative & evolutionary
development, rapid and flexible response to change
and promote communication [4,5]. The very nature
of this development process is in obeying the
principles of “light but sufficient”, people-oriented
and communication-centred. Due to the fact that this
is lightweight process, it is mostly used for small
scale projects [6]. The concept of Agile is that
production teams should start with simple and
predictable approximations to the final requirement
and then continue to increase the depth of these
requirements throughout the life of the development.
Indirectly this leads further to the refinements of
design, coding and testing at every stages of
production activity. As a result, the requirements
work product is as accurate and useful as the final
software should be [7].
Recent trend in software development
industry is to move towards Global Software
Development (GSD) and it is driven by various
factors such as improved network infrastructure,
move towards component-based architecture and
increased time-to-market pressure [8]. Due to Agile
Software Development (ASD) flexible approach in
managing requirement volatility and emphasis on
extensive collaboration between customers and
developers, an increased number of GSD project
managers are seriously considering introducing
agile practices [9].
Risks in agile projects are defined as an
uncertain event or set of events that should it occur
will have an effect on the accomplishment of
objectives [10]. The events can be categorised into
two categories positive or negative risks, while the
positive risks mean the rise of an opportunities and
negative risks means something that pose threat to
the project. So, a need to control activities arises
when there is an activity that can pose threat to the
project [11].
Identifying, assessing risks, and defining
suitable steps to manage these risks are important
[10]. Insufficient risk management could result in:
____________________________________________________________
International Journal of Supply Chain Management
IJSCM, ISSN: 2050-7399 (Online), 2051-3771 (Print)
Copyright © ExcelingTech Pub, UK (http://excelingtech.co.uk/)
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2019
1124
Inability to make knowledgeable risk
identifications and project resolutions.
Inability to effectively establish the
suitable risk response.
Absence of effective risk monitoring
resulting in unsuccessful or incompetent
management of risks.
Inadequate knowledge of when to
participate in risk operations.
The key to handle risks lies in the process
of identifying and prioritising of appropriate risk
response strategies based on risk exposure and in-
line with Agile practices. The ability to judge
whether a risk is managed effectively and efficiently
comes through monitoring the risk.
2. Related Works
As the paper focus on risk mitigation, it is
appropriate to provide brief introduction about the
existing risks in Global Software Development
which are spilt into 3 categories.
A. Geographical Distance
It is the physical separation between the
development teams. Two sites located in a same
country with ease to access, means of transportation
and reachability are considered as close even it is
separated by a large distance. While, two sites which
have little transportation and intervening border are
not considered geographical close [12].
B. Socio-Cultural Distance
The language, religion, social status, basic
assumptions and economical condition difference
between the development team members. Culture
plays a humongous part on how a people interact on
different problem, how they response and how they
resolve to the issue [13].
C. Temporal Distance
Time gap between two teams who want to
communicate is called temporal distance. Two
teams located at two different time zone are one of
the factors that result in temporal distance.
Geographical distance plays a big part in temporal
distance [12].
3. Methodology
SLR guidelines proposed by [14] have been
followed for this study. The definition of this
process is to identify, assess and interpret all
relevant and available research proofs in order to be
able to provide answers to the research questions
proposed.
A. Research Questions
Table 1 shows the criteria and scope of the
research questions structure, which is the
Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes
and Context [PICOC] structure.
(Table 1) Summary of PICOC
Criteria
Scope
Population
Papers proposing techniques for
risk mitigation
Intervention
Risk mitigation
Comparison
Agile GSD
Outcomes
Suggest how risk mitigation
techniques can be implemented in
Agile GSD
Context
Risk mitigation techniques
Based on Table 1, the research questions are:
[Q1] How many studies mentioned risk
mitigation in Agile GSD and when were the
initial and latest studies?
[Q2] Were any techniques proposed for risk
mitigation in Agile GSD?
B. Search Strategy
The search strategy used to construct the
search string was based on [15], which is as follows:
(1) Major terms are derived for use in the review
questions [for example: it will be based on
population, intervention, outcome and context] (2)
Known keywords mentioned in the articles are listed
(3) The use of Boolean AND in order to connect the
main terms to outcome, intervention and population.
Therefore, the complete search strings used
for this paper are as follows:
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2019
1125
[Agile OR Agile Methodology] AND [Risk
Mitigation OR Risk Management] AND [Global
Software Development OR GSD]
The research paper found were classified
according to the publication type. Later, different
search methods were employed by manually
filtering the conference, journals, books, and
websites by checking each of the publications that
were published in the year 2008 and later.
C. Selection Criteria
The inclusion criteria for this paper include
studies that primarily target Software Engineering
and focus on Agile GSD and risk mitigation
technique. The priority hierarchy from “most
important” to “least important” in regard to
publication type is as follows: Journals >
Conference Proceedings > Books > Websites >
White Papers.
In addition, the paper found must include
the following criteria in order to be included in this
paper.
Indexed by known databases such as IEEE
Xplore, Springer, SpringSim, ACM, etc.
Written in English
Subjects covered must include Software
Engineering, specifically in the Computer
Sciences field.
D. Qualitative Analysis
To speed up the data extraction process, a
form was designed. It was used to gather proof
related to the research question and as a qualitative
measurement for the study. Table 2 shows the
questions that were asked after the keywords chosen
for this study were analysed.
(Table 2) Questions
Question
Answer
Q2. Was the article about
Agile and GSD
specifically?
Yes/No
Q3. Was Risk Mitigation
mentioned in the paper
Yes/No
Q4. Did the paper make
mention of a
quantitative
measurement regarding
the effectiveness of the
study?
Yes/No/Partial
Q5. Will the paper
contribute to the
research conducted?
Yes/No/Partial
4. Results
Appendix A shows the results of the search
procedure. Initially, we identified 53 papers.
However, after completing qualitative analysis, we
only managed to identify 40 papers relevant to the
study and SLR references.
Although some of the papers might propose
a technique for risk mitigation, they were not
selected. This is because they were either not meant
for Agile GSD or were for learning purposes.
The papers in Appendix A were reviewed
individually while data was extracted, and questions
proposed during the qualitative analysis were
answered. The answers to the questions have been
recorded.
A. Sources of the Study
Based on table from Appendix A, the main
sources for the papers were books focusing on Agile
Methodology. Although the years of the books vary,
fifteen publication came from such sources.
Conference proceedings follow as a primary source,
with most papers coming from IEEE, ResearchGate
and Springer. Finally, there were 9 journals and the
rest from white paper. Most of the sources are about
risk mitigation and agile methodology. Table 3
below shows the sources of papers found and the
amount of paper for each source.
(Table 3) Papers Found
Type
Number of
publications
Journal
1
Journal
1
Proceedings
1
Proceedings
5
Proceedings
1
Journal
1
Proceedings
1
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2019
1126
ICTMS
Proceedings
1
IC3
Proceedings
1
APSEES
Proceedings
1
ITMC
Proceedings
1
AEECT
Proceedings
1
KBEI
Proceedings
1
PACIS
Proceedings
1
ICISA
Proceedings
1
ProjMAN
Proceedings
1
RITO
Proceedings
1
CoCoNet
Proceedings
1
ICSS
Proceedings
1
TOSEJ
Journal
1
ICEMT
Proceedings
1
IST
Journal
3
ICCSA
Proceedings
1
AHFE
Proceedings
1
ITOR
Journal
1
SEKE
Proceedings
1
IET
Journal
1
CCIS
Proceedings
1
UBMK
Proceedings
1
PICMET
Proceedings
1
ECIS
Proceedings
1
Book Review
Book
15
White Paper
1
5. Discussion
In this section, we discuss about the
answers to the studies research questions.
Q1: How many studies mentioned risk
mitigation in Agile GSD and when were the initial
and latest studies?
Around 30 studies mentioned both risk
mitigation and Agile GSD. 12 papers talked about
risk mitigation. Only 5 mentioned Agile GSD. The
latest study that mentioned agile GSD and risk
mitigation was from 2018 and, according to this
SLR, the initial study was from 2008
Q2: Were any techniques proposed for risk
mitigation in Agile GSD?
This SLR found 17 papers provide existing
techniques for risk mitigation in Agile GSD.
6. Conclusion
There are quite a few established studies
regarding risk mitigation in Agile GSD. We
conducted an extensive literature review using 9
journals, 28 conferences, 15 books and 1 white
paper, with most of the material coming from 2014.
Based on this review, we noted that there is
extensive evidence that integration would
definitively benefit IT organizations that use the
Agile GSD in developing software. Without proper
risk mitigation plans development process of a
software can bring unnecessary risks.
Acknowledgments
This project is supported by Tier 1 Grant Scheme,
Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM),
and Research Management Centre (RMC), under
the Vot Project Number: H130
References
[1] Andrew Begel, Nachiappan Nagappan, “Usage and
Perceptions of Agile Software Development in an Industrial
Context:An Exploratory Study”, First International
symposium on empirical software engineering and
measurement, pp. 255-264, 2007.
[2] P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, J. Ronkainen, and J. Warsta,
Agile software development methods - Review and
analysis, VTT Electronics ed.: VTT Publications, 2002.
[3] E., Hossain, M., A., Babar, H., Paik, “Risk Identification
and Mitigation Processes for Using Scrum in Global
Software Development: A Conceptual Framework” 16th
Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, (2009).
[4] Ying Wang, Dayong Sang, Wujie Xie, “Analysis on Agile
Software Development Methods from the View of
Informationalization Supply Chain Management”, 3rd
International Symposium on Intelligent Information
Technology Application Workshops”, pp. 219-222, 2009.
[5] Peter Maher, “Weaving Agile Software Development
Techniques into a Traditional Computer Science
Curriculum”, Proc. of 6th IEEE International Conference on
Information Technology: New Generation, pp. 1687-1688,
2009.
[6] Anfan Zuo, Jing Yang, Xiaowen Chen, “Research of Agile
Software Development Based on Formal Methods”,
International Conference on Multimedia Information
Networking and Security, pp. 762-766, 2010.
[7] Michael J Rees, “A Feasible User Story Tool for Agile
Software Development”, Proc. Of 9th Asia-Pacific
Software Engineering Conference (APSEC’ 02), 2002.
[8] J. Sutherland, A. Viktorov, J. Blount, N. Puntikov,
“Distributed Scrum: Agile Project management with
Outsourced Development Teams” in Proceedings of the
Conference on HICSS’40, pp. 274, 2007.
[9] J. Sutherland, G. Schoonheim, M. Rijk, “Fully distributed
Scrum: Replacing Local Productivity and Quality with
Offshore Teams,” in proceedings of the Conference on
HICSS’42, pp. 1-8, 2009.
[10] Sommerville I. (2006). Software Engineering, (7th Ed.),
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
[11] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Risk
Management," CDC UP Practice Guides, Atlanta, 2006.
[12] Holmstrom, H., Conchúir, E. Ó., Agerfalk, J., & Fitzgerald,
B. (2006). Global software development challenges: A case
study on temporal, geographical and socio-cultural distance.
Paper presented at the International Conference on Global
Software Engineering, ICGSE,2006.
[13] Helena, H., Eoin, O. C ., Par, J. A., & Brian, F. (2006, Oct.
2006). Global Software Development Challenges: A Case
Study on Temporal, Geographical and Socio-Cultural
Distance. Paper presented at the International Conference
on Global Software Engineering, ICGSE ,2006.
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2019
1127
[14] B. Kitchenham and S. Charters. Guidelines for performing
systematic literature reviews in software engineering.
Version, 2:200701, 2007.
[15] Salleh N., Mendes E., and Grundy J., Empirical Studies of
Pair Programming for CS/SE Teaching in Higher
Education: A Systematic Literature Review, IEEE
Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 37, no. 4,
pp.509-505, 2011.
[16] Gaurav Kumar, Pradeep Kumar Bhatia, “Impact of Agile
Methodology on Software Development Process”,
International Journal of Computer Technology and
Electronics Engineering (IJCTEE) 2012.
[17] Abdulaziz Alsahli, Hameed Khan and Sultan Alyahya,
Agile Development Overcomes GSD Challenges: A
Systematic Literature Review”, International Journal of
Computer Science and Software Engineering 2017.
[18] M.J. Akhtar, A. Ahsan, W.Z. Sadiq, “Scrum Adoption,
Acceptance and Implementation”, IEEM 2010.
[19] V. Mudumba, D. Lee, “A New Perspective on GDSD Risk
Management”, International Conference on Global
Software Engineering 2010.
[20] E., Hossain, M., A., Babar, H., Paik, “Using Scrum in
Global Software Development: A Systematic Literature
Review”, 4th IEEE International Conference on Global
Software Engineering 2009.
[21] Franz Zieris, Stephan Salinger, “Doing Scrum Rather Than
Being Agile: A Case Study on Actual Nearshoring
Practices”, 8th International Conference on Global
Software Engineering 2013.
[22] Indira Nurdiani, Ronald Jabangwe, Darja ˇSmite, Daniela
Damian, Risk Identification and Risk Mitigation
Instruments for Global Software Development: Systematic
Review and Survey Results”, 6th International Conference
on Global Software Engineering Workshops 2011.
[23] J. M. Verner, O. P. Brereton, B. A . Kitchenham, M.
Turner, Systematic Literature Reviews in Global Software
Development: A Tertiary Study”, EASE 2012.
[24] Suprika Vasudeva Shrivastava and Hema Date,
Distributed Agile Software Development: A Review”,
Journal of Computer Science and Engineering 2010.
[25] Arif Ali Khana, Shuib Basrib, P.D.D. Dominc, “A Proposed
Framework for Communication Risks during RCM in
GSD”, International Conference on Innovation,
Management and Technology Research 2013.
[26] Suprika Vasudeva Shrivastava , Urvashi Rathod, “Risks in
distributed agile development: A review”, ICTMS-2013.
[27] Ruchi Agrawal, Deepali Singh, Ashish Sharma,
Prioritizing and Optimizing Risk Factors in Agile Software
development”, ICCC 2016.
[28] Christopher R. Nelson, Gil Taran, and Lucia de Lascurain
Hinojosa, “Explicit Risk Management in Agile Processes”,
APSEES 2008.
[29] Lubna Siddique, B. A. Hussein, “PRACTICAL INSIGHT
ABOUT RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESS IN AGILE
SOFTWARE PROJECTS IN NORWAY”, ITMC 2014.
[30] Aalaa Albadarneh, Israa Albadarneh, Abdallah Qusef,
Risk Management in Agile Software Development: a
Comparative Study”, Jordan Conference on Applied
Electrical Engineering and Computing Technologies 2015.
[31] A. I. Yehia, Q. G. Asif, “AGILE GLOBAL SOFTWARE
DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES:
A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW”, PACIS 2014.
[32] Sunil Kumar Khatri, Khushboo Bahr, Prashant Johri, “Best
Practices for Managing Risk in Adaptive Agile Process”,
RITO 2014.
[33] H. Andrat, S. Jaswal, An Alternative Approach for Risk
Assessment in Scrum”, CoCoNet 2015.
[34] Marc Schmalz, A. Finn, H. Taylor, Risk Management in
Video Game Development Projects”, ICSS 2014.
[35] A. Khoja, B.S. Chowdary, L. Dhirani, Q. Kalhoro, “Quality
Control and Risk mitigation: A Comparison of Project
Management Methodologies in Practice”, ICEMT 2010.
[36] J.M. Verner , O.P. Brereton , B.A. Kitchenham , M. Turner
, M. Niazi, “Risks and risk mitigation in global software
development: A tertiary study”, IST 2014.
[37] Suprika Vasudeva Shrivastava , Urvashi Rathod,
Categorization of Risk Factors for Distributed Agile
Projects”, IST 2014.
[38] Suprika Vasudeva Shrivastava , Urvashi Rathod, A Risk
Management Framework for Distributed Agile
Projects”, IST 2016.
[39] Joana Oliveira, Margarida Vinhas, Filipe da Costa1,
Marcelo Nogueira, Pedro Ribeiro, and Ricardo J. Machado,
Is Scrum Useful to Mitigate Project’s Risks in Real
Business Contexts?”, ICCSA 2016.
[40] Muhammad Ahmed, Babur Hayat Malik, Rana M. Tahir,
Sidra Perveen, Rabia Imtiaz Alvi, Azra Rehmat, Qura Tul
Ain, and Mehrina Asghar, Estimation of Risks in Scrum
Using Agile Software Development”, AHFE 2018.
[41] Breno GontijoTavaresa,Carlos Eduardo SanchesdaSilvaa
andAdler DinizdeSouza, “Risk management analysis in
Scrum software projects”, ITOR 2017.
[42] Breno Gontijo Tavares, Carlos Eduardo Sanches da Silva,
Adler Diniz de Souza, “Risk Management Analysis in
Software Projects which Use the Scrum Framework”,
SEKE 2017.
[43] Antti Välimäki, Jukka Kääriäinen, and Kai Koskimies,
Global Software Development Patterns for Project
Management”, IET 2009.
[44] Murat Dogus Kahya, Cagla Seneler, Geographical Distance
Challenges in Distributed Agile Software Development:
Case Study of a Global Company, UBMK 2018.
[45] Lucio Ribeiro, Cristine Gusmão, Wilmar Feijó, Vicente
Bezerra, A Case Study for the Implementation of an Agile
Risk Management Process in Multiple Projects
Environments, PICMET 2009.
[46] S. Coyle, K. Conboy, A CASE STUDY OF RISK
MANAGEMENT IN AGILE SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT, ECIS 2015
[47] Sadhana Deshpande, Global Software Development
Coordination Strategies - A Vendor Perspective
2011.
[48] A. Moran, Risk Management in Agile Projects 2016.
[49] Rory V. O’Connor, Software Process Improvement
2016.
[50] A. Moran, Agile risk management, in Agile Risk
Management, Springer Briefs in Computer Science
(Springer International Publishing, 2014), pp. 3360.
[51] B. Meyer. Agile! The Good, the Hypa and the Ugly.
Springer Ed.1, 2014
[52] T. Silva da Silva, Agile Methods 2017, pp 16-27.
[53] R. Freeman, Agile Software Development 2016
[54] C. Schmidt, Agile Software Development Team
2016, pp 7-35.
[55] A. Medinilla, Agile Management 2012, pp 53-66.
[56] O. Hazzan, Agile Anywhere 2014, pp 63-65.
[57] J. Dalton, Great Big Agile 2018
[58] V. A. Santos, Agile Methods 2018
[59] T.J. Brizard, Broken Agile 2015.
[60] Dingsyor, The Agile Consultant 2010
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2019
1128
Appendix A
ID
Author
Year
Title
Type
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
S1
Gaurav
Kumar
2012
Impact of Agile Methodology on Software Development
Process
Journal
Y
N
P
P
S2
Abdulaziz
Alsahli
2017
Agile Development Overcomes GSD Challenges: A
Systematic Literature Review
Journal
Y
Y
Y
P
S3
M. J. Akhtar
2010
Scrum Adoption, Acceptance and Implementation
Proceedings
Y
N
N
P
S4
V. Mudumba
2010
A New Perspective on GDSD Risk Management
Proceedings
Y
Y
P
Y
S5
Emam
Hossain
2009
Using Scrum in Global Software Development: A
Systematic Literature Review
Proceedings
Y
N
Y
P
S6
Emam
Hossain
2009
Risk Identification and Mitigation Processes for Using
Scrum in Global Software Development: A Conceptual
Framework
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
Y
S7
Franz Zieris
2013
Doing Scrum Rather Than Being Agile: A Case Study on
Actual Nearshoring Practices
Proceedings
Y
N
N
P
S8
Indira
Nurdiani
2011
Risk Identification and Risk Mitigation Instruments for
Global Software Development: Systematic Review and
Survey Results
Proceedings
Y
Y
P
Y
S9
J. M. Verner
2012
Systematic Literature Reviews in Global Software
Development: A Tertiary Study
Proceedings
N
N
P
N
S10
Suprika
Vasudeva
Shrivastava
2010
Distributed Agile Software Development: A Review
Journal
Y
Y
N
P
S11
Arif Ali
Khan
2013
A Proposed Framework for Communication Risks during
RCM in GSD
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
Y
S12
Suprika
Vasudeva
Shrivastava
2013
Risks in distributed agile development: A review
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
Y
S13
Ruchi
Agrawal
2016
Prioritizing and Optimizing Risk Factors in Agile Software
development
Proceedings
Y
Y
Y
P
S14
Christopher
R. Nelson
2008
Explicit Risk Management in Agile Processes
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
P
S15
Lubna
Siddique
2014
Practical Insight about Risk Management Process in Agile
Software Projects in Norway
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
P
S16
Aalaa
Albadarneh
2015
Risk Management in Agile Software Development: a
Comparative Study
Proceedings
Y
Y
P
Y
S17
Benjamin
Gold
2015
Using Risk Management to Balance Agile Methods
Proceedings
N
Y
N
N
S18
Yehia
Ibrahim
Alzoubi
2014
Agile Global Software Development Communication
Challenges: A Systematic Review
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
P
S19
Muhammad
Usman
2014
Analysing and Reducing Risk Factor in 3-C’s Model
Communication Phase used in Global Software
Development
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
P
S20
Zakari Tsiga
2017
Implementation of a Risk Management Simulation Tool
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
P
S21
Sunil Kumar
Khatri
2014
Best Practices for Managing Risk in Adaptive Agile
Process
Proceedings
N
Y
Y
P
S22
Hycinta
Andrat
2015
An Alternative Approach for Risk Assessment in Scrum
Proceedings
N
Y
Y
P
S23
Marc
Schmalz
2014
Risk Management in Video Game Development Projects
Proceedings
N
Y
N
N
S24
Ansgar
Lamersdorf
2010
Studying the Impact of Global Software Development
Characteristics on Project Goals: A Causal Model
Journal
N
N
P
Y
S23
Shakeel A.
Khoja
2010
Quality Control and Risk mitigation: A Comparison of
Project Management Methodologies in Practice
Proceedings
Y
Y
P
Y
S24
J. M. Verner
2014
Risks and Risk Mitigation in Global Software
Development: A Tertiary Study
Journal
N
Y
N
P
Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 2, April 2019
1129
S25
Suprika
Vasudeva
Shrivastava
2014
Categorization of Risk Factors for Distributed Agile
Projects
Journal
Y
Y
P
Y
S26
Suprika
Vasudeva
Shrivastava
2016
A Risk Management Framework for Distributed Agile
Projects
Journal
Y
Y
Y
Y
S27
Joana
Oliveira
2016
Is Scrum Useful to Mitigate Project’s Risks in Real
Business Contexts?
Proceedings
Y
Y
P
Y
S28
Muhammad
Ahmed
2018
Estimation of Risks in Scrum Using Agile Software
Development
Proceedings
Y
Y
N
P
S29
Breno
Gontijo
Tavares
2017
Risk management analysis in Scrum software projects
Journal
N
Y
N
N
S30
Breno
Gontijo
Tavares
2017
Risk Management Analysis in Software Projects which Use
the Scrum Framework
Proceedings
N
N
P
N
S31
Muhammad
Hammad
2018
Integrating Risk Management in Scrum Framework
Proceedings
Y
Y
Y
Y
S32
S. Sundarajan
2014
Case Study on Risk Management Practice in Large
Offshore-Outsourced Agile Software Projects
Journal
Y
Y
P
Y
S33
Antti
Välimäki
2009
Global Software Development Patterns for Project
Management
Proceedings
Y
N
N
N
S34
Murat Dogus
Kahya
2018
Geographical Distance Challenges in Distributed Agile
Software Development: Case Study of a Global Company
Proceedings
Y
Y
P
P
S35
Lucio Ribeiro
2009
A Case Study for the Implementation of an Agile Risk
Management Process in Multiple Projects Environments
Proceedings
Y
Y
Y
Y
S36
C. Sharon
2015
A Case Study of Risk Management in Agile Systems
Development
Proceedings
N
Y
N
N
S37
Sadhana
Deshpande
2011
Global Software Development Coordination Strategies - A
Vendor Perspective
Book
N
N
N
N
S38
A. Moran
2016
Risk Management in Agile Projects
Book
N
Y
P
P
S39
Rory V.
O’Connor
2009
Software Process Improvement
Book
Y
Y
N
P
S40
A. Moran
2014
Agile Risk Management
Book
Y
Y
P
P
S41
B. Meyer
2014
Agile!
Book
N
N
N
N
S42
A. Moran
2015
Managing Agile
Book
Y
Y
P
P
S43
T. Silva da
Silva
2017
Agile Methods
Book
N
N
P
N
S44
Dingsyor
2010
The Agile Consultant
Book
Y
Y
N
P
S45
R. Freeman
2016
Agile Software Development
Book
Y
Y
N
P
S46
C. Schmidt
2016
Agile Software Team Development
Book
N
Y
Y
P
S47
A. Medinilla
2012
Agile Management
Book
N
Y
N
P
S48
O. Hazzan
2014
Agile Anywhere
Book
N
N
N
N
S49
J. Dalton
2018
Great Big Agile
Book
Y
Y
P
P
S50
V. A. Santos
2018
Agile Methods
Book
N
N
P
N
S51
T. J. Brizard
2015
Broken Agile
Book
Y
Y
P
P
S52
A. Elbanna
2015
Risks of Agile Software Development: Learning from
Adopters
White Paper
N
Y
N
N
S53
J. Munch
2011
Risk Management in Global Software Development
Projects: Challenges, Solutions, and Experience
Proceedings
N
Y
N
P
... [17][18][19][20] This is unfortunate because a systematic approach to risk management can potentially reduce uncertainty and increase the chances of success on software projects. [21][22][23][24][25][26] Without a systematic approach to risk management, important risks are likely to be ignored. 27 Ineffective risk management has been associated with agile project failures. ...
... 27 Ineffective risk management has been associated with agile project failures. 28 Further, several scholars have suggested the need for risk management practices to improve the chances of success of agile projects 14,20,25,27,29,30 and some have noted that it may be desirable to integrate such practices from traditional projects to ensure effective risk management in agile methods. 18,20 However, risk management processes need to stay true to the spirit of agility and the use of traditional practices may overload them. ...
Article
Full-text available
Lack of risk management or its inadequate application is one reason that software development projects fail. Agile methods, which have become increasingly popular, do not offer specific activities to manage risks. We develop and evaluate a tool for managing risks in software development projects that use agile methods. The proposed tool provides a collection of risk management practices and an iterative lifecycle. To analyze the effectiveness of the proposed tool we conducted an experiment with the participation of experts in agile methods. Our tool increased the effectiveness of risk response planning without increasing the time invested in this process. KEYWORDS Software development; risk management; agile methods; success of agile projects
... Since only the right management approach can enable the managers to make correct calculations to allocate the right percentage of resources to the right places at the right time. Moreover, the application of a relevant management approach enables the mitigation of risk and the magnitude of projected losses [2,26]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Over the past several years, global project management teams have been facing dynamic challenges that continue to grow exponentially with the increasing number of complexities associated with the undertaken tasks. The ever-evolving organizational challenges demand project managers to adapt novel management practices to accomplish organizational goals rather than following traditional management practices. Considering which, the current study aims to explain the effect of agile management practices upon project performance directly as well as while being mediated through project complexity. Furthermore, the aforementioned mediatory relationship is evaluated in terms of the moderating effect of leadership competencies. The current study utilized the survey approach to collect the data from registered I.T firms deployed in the potential metropolitans of each province of Pakistan including, Peshawar, Islamabad, Lahore, Sialkot, Faisalabad, Hyderabad, Sukkur, and Karachi. A total of 176 responses were utilized for statistical evaluations. As result, it was observed that the negative influence anticipated by project complexity on project performance was compensated by the agile management practices. Further, the leadership competencies played a pivotal role in managing project complexity while implementing agile management practices and therefore enhancing project performance. The current study abridges the potential knowledge gap conceptually by evaluating the direct impact of agile management upon project performance while considering all of its aspects, exploring the mediatory role of project performance and evaluating the moderating role of leadership competencies in attaining optimum project performance. In contextual terms, the current study fills the knowledge gap by gauging the implications of agile management practices within the I.T sector of Pakistan. The results of the current study can be a potential guide for both the academicians and the industry professionals.
... we observe the differences between agile methods and traditional methods. Overhage and Schlauderer, 2012 Agile methods are running from the philosophy of close, intermittent and compiled collaborations, having as main characteristics adaptive planning evolutionary development, flexibility in the face of changes and continuous communication (Akil Rafeek, 2019). In their research, Lopez-Alcarria, et al. ...
... This section discusses the findings of the SLR and empirical research to answer the research questions mentioned in Section1. Based on the SLR, researchers found 18 studies described in Appendix A [14]- [31]. ...
Article
Full-text available
A software house, that established in 2005 based in Indonesia, got 31 projects in 2019. By the end of year, Project Management Officer released documents to inform company’s project health. There are 14 projects confirmed late, 6 projects on time and 11 projects scheduled complete on the next year. That late projects cause serious problem like loses revenue and gets disrupted of company’s cash flow. Based on the root cause analysis, it found that no standardization of software development process in the company. Before designing the standardization to improve process, we need to analyze the obstacles that might be happened. Therefore, this study aims to identify the obstacles on software process improvement in software house. We performed a systematic literature review to determine the obstacles, then we do empirical research to 58 employees on company’s development department to sort the priority of obstacles in the company. From the systematic literature review, we found studies that relevant and there are 13 obstacles of software process improvement, then from the empirical research we got top three obstracles. We also proposed recommendations to solve that obstacles.
Article
Full-text available
Recently, most software projects became naturally Distributed Agile Development (DAD) projects. The main benefits of DAD projects are cost-saving and being close to markets due to their distributed nature, such as in large-scale Scrum (LeSS). Developing LeSS projects leads to the emergence of challenges in risk management, especially the team collaboration challenges, where there is no standardized process for teams to communicate collaboratively. Team collaboration and the knowledge sharing is a vital resource for a large Scrum team's success. Hence, finding a dynamic technique that facilitates team collaboration in the LeSS environment is necessary. This paper proposes a risk management framework for LeSS using outer metadata requests. The proposed framework manages the outer requests amongst the distributed team. Therefore, it avoids missing team collaboration, risks, and threats to project completion. It also contributes to exchanging team skills and experience. The proposed framework is evaluated by applying it to two different case studies for large-scale Scrum projects. The evaluation results are given. The evaluation proved the effectiveness of the proposed framework. Keywords-Distributed agile development; knowledge sharing; risk management; large scale scrum; metadata outer request management
Article
Full-text available
Agile practices have made a significant impact in Global Software Development (GSD). Literature review papers on agile practices in global software development have been limited by constraints of traditional methods to manually select and analyze research papers. The purpose of this study is to leverage an enhanced automated way to analyze literature to establish dimensions of agile global software development covering around 144 journal articles in SCOPUS. The study unravels key themes latent in the academic literature, identify dominant topics and summarize interpretation around agile practices deployed in global software development setup. This study uses an effective and efficient topic modelling by using LDA method and identifies four dominant clusters.
Chapter
Several risks are inherent to software development, such as those related to schedule, budget, and stakeholder expectations. In agile software development methods, risks management is typically carried out implicitly, through practices such as small increments, job visibility and expectations management that tend to keep risks under control and minimize their impact. However, for many software development contexts, such as in highly regulated domains, as finance, healthcare or automotive, for example, only these implicit practices may not be sufficient. However, the practices commonly used for project risk management were developed in the context of traditional project management environments and are not adapted to the agile software development values and principles. Thus, this paper presents a guide to agile risk management in software projects. The structure of the guide is defined based on standards and reference models and its content is developed based on the analysis of the state of the art and the traditional risk management literature. A web tool is also developed to facilitate access and understanding of the guide’s content. A preliminary evaluation of the Guide content is performed through an Expert Panel. The results of this preliminary evaluation raise initial indications that the content of the guide is comprehensive and can be applied to different contexts of software development.
Chapter
The main purpose of an Agile development method is to reduce risks, leading to a more successful and effective information system as it had overcome limitations faced in a traditional software development method. This reason lead many to adopt the Agile methodology, especially for global software development (GSD) projects. However, most are not aware of the risks introduced when using agile methods in GSD projects. The risks in GSD projects are dynamic due to factor multiplicity (e.g., multi-locations, multi-groups, multi-cultures, multi-technologies, and multi-standards). This study aims to distinguish the difference between two risk mitigation techniques as an overall technique in tackling the same issue, which is communication issues introduced by the geographical distance between two development teams.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Over the last decade, distributed software development (DSD) becomes very popular for most of the major companies. According to the effects of globalization, software development methodologies and practices are also impressed. Because of the underlying philosophy of agile, agile teams concentrate on communication that is mostly applicable for collocated teams. Most of the companies that apply distributed development, adopted Agile software methodology into their software development lifecycle to mitigate challenges. Regarding this, DSD brings along various challenges to be conducted by the distributed development team and also difficulties to apply Agile practices at different locations. In this paper, the findings from a case study on temporal challenges in three small, one medium and one large distributed agile software development projects are presented. In-depth interviews were conducted with 12 interviewees who are working for a German-based global company that operates more than twenty countries.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Studies show one of the reasons for the failure of the software projects is the absence of Risk Management or its improper application. The adoption of Scrum Framework on software projects is increasing. However, the Scrum does not have specific Risk Management activities. In this scenario, this paper presents the results of a survey applied using qualitative approach, in order to analyze how Risk Management is carried out in software projects, which use Scrum. The research method adopted was the case study and the research instrument for data collection was developed based on scientific articles and the application of structured interviews. As a result, this paper presents Risk Management practices which achieved greater and lower agreement among respondents and literature. It was found that Risk Management must be applied continuously in a feedback loop. Furthermore, Scrum projects must not have a high formal planning level, even for the high risk ones. This result does not converge to the literature. The research verified that the Risk Management in Scrum projects is performed differently from its application on traditional methodologies. The framework has native resources, but the use of the classic Risk Management processes must be incorporated and adapted to Scrum.
Article
Full-text available
One of the reasons for the failure of software projects is the absence of risk management procedures or its improper application. The adoption of Scrum in software projects is increasing. However, such approach does not specify risk management activities. This paper presents the results of a survey conducted using a qualitative approach to analyze how risk management is carried out in Scrum software projects. Consequently, we present risk management practices that achieved greater and lesser agreement among respondents and the literature, respectively. We found that risk management must be applied continuously in a feedback loop. Furthermore, Scrum projects must not have a high formal planning level, even for high-risk ones. The research verified that risk management in Scrum is performed differently from its application in traditional approaches. The framework has native resources, but classic processes of risk management would be incorporated and adapted.
Article
Full-text available
This paper aims to discover several Global Software Development (GSD) challenges existing in the literature and review several agile practices available to mitigate those challenges with special focus on Scrum and its practices since it is the most wildly used in GSD setting. A total of 24 papers are identified as relevant papers and data from those papers are used to reveal how agile practices can be used to mitigate known GSD challenges. Thus, this paper can be a reference to GSD developers and agile practitioners to recognize latest agile remedies available to reduce GSD challenges
Article
Context Distributed agile development (DAD) approach has been adopted by the software companies for cost and time benefits. However, it causes significant challenges considering the contradicting nature of the agile and distributed development. Objective The objective of this study is to develop a risk management framework that comprises the perceived risks in DAD projects, their causes and the methods used in industry for managing those risks. Method This work is an extension of an exploratory study, wherein, DAD practitioners reported the risks they face in projects and the methods they use for managing those risks. The identified risks were further categorized based on their relevance to different aspects of DAD projects. In this extension, industry practitioners ranked the risks for their impact on DAD projects and rated the methods for the frequency of their use in projects. As the number of risks under each category was large for ranking, they were grouped under the risk areas within each category. The ranking of risk categories, risk areas and risk factors for their impact on DAD projects manifests their importance. The framework includes ranked risks, their causes and the risk management approaches. It was partially implemented in live projects in three different companies and was found to be beneficial. Results The perceived impact of the risk categories, ‘Group Awareness’, ‘External Stakeholder Collaboration’ and ‘Software Development Life Cycle’ on DAD projects has been found to be high and caused by the properties of Distributed Software Development (DSD). The partial validation of the framework in three companies reported the elimination of majority of risk factors and/or reduction in their impact. Conclusion DAD projects provide significant benefits but hold substantial risks due to the contradiction between distributed development and agile practices. The reported framework could effectively minimize the DAD risks in practice.
Article
In an often overlooked aspect of agile, Alan Moran, Managing Director of the Swiss based Institute for Agile Risk Management, explains how agile practices contribute to the bottom line of your organisation.