Abstract
To have the software development process a fruitful one we have to consider the critical factors of success of agile development. Any organisation is expected to deliver the end product timely with required and on agreed upon terms which is many a times beaten by the extended time taken to complete the software projects or also leading to unexpected increase in the budget of the projects. So today’s development processes embed agile implementation for the accelerating growth of the company, organisation with fast competition of their work. The conventional approach of software systems succumbs towards the ever changing and much needed twist of the “Agile process” to be implemented. Agile focuses on collaborative work for the lifecycle of the project to continue iteratively with anticipating changes and introducing more flexibility than prior traditional approaches. Small sprints remain utilized which are mandatory for effective item conveyance. Conventional programming advancement forms are very little proficient to deal with the fast change in necessities. In spite of the upsides of Agile, feedback on deft approach expresses that it neglects to focus on building and configuration issues and subsequently will undoubtedly create little outline decisions. Agile programming improvement has quickly picked up a great deal of enthusiasm for the field of programming designing. Agile programming development, in spite of its curiosity, is a critical area of research inside programming building discipline. Logical research is yet rare, there has been minimal nitty gritty revealing of the use, entrance and achievement of light-footed systems in customary, proficient programming advancement organisations. In this paper we will evaluate the agile success factors for the product outcomes. The manuscript takes the approach for deciding best agile success factors influencing quality in software industry using analytic network process (ANP). This paper applies ANP to conclude the best way out using nine criteria namely Agile implementation, root cause analysis, mutation testing, cycle time, test and learn approach, continuous integration, process action, IT governance strategy, organisational change, effective risk mitigation, feedback, tangible outcomes, and two alternatives in the form Scrum and Kanban agile framework. The projected approach was tested in a organisation application in software reliability, software development environment and this paper evaluates its effectiveness by giving the weightage to the factor by realising the precise objective.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alqudah M, Razali R (2017) A comparison of scrum and Kanban for identifying their selection factors, pp 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICEEI.2017.8312434
Cho YH, Mccullough BF, Weissmann J (1996) Considerations on finite-element method application in pavement structural analysis. Transportation Research Record 1539. Transportation Research Board,Washington, DC, pp 96–101
Chung SA, Kim GM (2003) Performance effects of partnership between manufacturers and suppliers for new product development: the supplier's standpoint. Res Policy 32(4):587–603
Fowler M, Highsmith J (2000) The agile manifesto, vol 9
Gencer C, Gürpinar D (2007) Analytic network process in supplier selection: a case study in an electronic firm. Appl Math Model 31:2475–2486. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2006.10.002
Gupta V, Kapur PK, Kumar D (2016) Modeling and measuring code smells in enterprise applications using TISM and 2 assessment. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 7(3):332–340
Hämäläinen RAND, Seppäläinen T (1986) The analytic network process in energy policy planning. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 20(6):399–405
Kravchenko T, Seredenko N (2011) Decision-making with the modeling of problem situations using the analytic network hierarchy process. Int J Anal Hierarchy Process 3(1):28–30
Kumar V, Kapur PK, Taneja N, Sahni R (2017) On allocation of resources during testing phase incorporating flexible software reliability growth model with testing effort under dynamic environment. Int J Oper Res 30(4):523–539
Lee J, Kim S (2000) Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection. Comput Oper Res 27(4):367–382
Meade L, Presley A (2002). R&D project selection using the analytic network process. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 49(1):59–66. https://doi.org/10.1109/17.985748.
Meredith S, Francis D (2000) Journey towards agility: the agile wheel explored. TQM Mag 12(2):137–143
Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drzal LT et al (2005) Natural Fibers, Biopolymer and Biocomposites. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 20–21
Prince J, Kay JM (2003) Combining lean and agile characteristics: creation of virtual groups by enhanced production flow analysis. Int J Prod Econ 85:305–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00118-X
Saaty TL (1996) The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation, 2nd edn. RWS Publications, Pittsburg, PA
Saaty T (2004) Fundamentals of the analytic network process—dependence and feedback in decision-making with a single network. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 13(2):129–157
Saaty T (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83
Saaty TL, Vargas LG (2013) The analytic network process. In: Decision making with the analytic network process. International series in operations research & management science, vol 195. Springer, Boston, MA
Saaty T, Vargas L (1979) Estimating technological coefficients by the analytic hierarchy process. Socio-Econ Plan Sci 13(6):333–336
Srivastava A, Kapur PK, Mehrotra D (2017) Modelling fault detection with change-point in agile software development environment. In: Infocom technologies and unmanned systems (trends and future directions) (ICTUS), pp 303–308. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTUS.2017.8286023
Srivastava A, Kapur PK, Mehrotra D, Majumdar R (2019) Modelling fault detection using srgm in agile environment and ranking of models. J Cases Inf 21(2):1–20. https://doi.org/10.4018/jcit.2019040101
Tuzkaya UR, Önüt S (2008) A fuzzy analytic network process based approach to transportation-mode selection between Turkey and Germany: a case study. Inf Sci 178:3133–3146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.03.0
Wu WW, Lee Y-T (2007) Developing global managers' competencies using the fuzzy DEMATEL method. Expert Syst Appl 32:499–507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2005.12.005
Wynstra F, Ten Pierick E (2000) Managing supplier involvement in new product development: a portfolio approach. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 6(1):49–57
Yurdakul M (2003) Measuring long-term performance of a manufacturing firm using the Analytic Network Process (ANP) approach. Int J Prod Res 41:2501–2529. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020754031000088183
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Srivastava, A., Mehrotra, D., Kapur, P.K. et al. Analytical evaluation of agile success factors influencing quality in software industry. Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag 11 (Suppl 2), 247–257 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-00966-z
Received:
Revised:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13198-020-00966-z