Journal Articles (All Issues)

Abstract

Software project companies are increasingly delivering complicated, customized software products and services. As a result of the difficulties of working in dynamic and unexpected software delivery settings, Agile techniques were created. As obligatory guidelines, there are four basic ideals and twelve guiding principles in the Agile Manifesto. However, its execution is highly dependent on project teams and their organizational environment in each scenario. The Agile technique is highly linked to team values as well as the overall corporate culture in a specific team setting when used in daily cooperation. Team values, in turn, are dependent on team members and their motivation, which is fueled by autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Project team values change because of Agile transformation, which is the focus of this research. As empirical research, a desk review, and findings of various case study analyses in firms experiencing Agile transformation are given. Researchers found that project teams' values are affected by the Agile transformation process. According to the results, an Agile transformation had an influence on a project team's attitude to work organization, which could be examined from a range of views ranging from a sense of humor to a feeling of bravery and concentration. Project values, as well as the agility and culture of the project organization, may be impacted by large organizational changes.

References

1. Ravichandran, T. (in press, 2017) “Exploring the relationships between IT competence, innovation capacity and organizational agility”, The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, (Accepted for publication July 2017). 2. Nuottila, J., Aaltonen, K. and Kujala, J. (2016) “Challenges of adopting agile methods in a public organization”, International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 65-85. 3. Moe, N.B. and Dingsøyr, T. (2017) Emerging Research Themes and updated Research Agenda for Large-Scale Agile Development: A Summary of the 5th International Workshop at XP2017. In: Proceedings of the XP2017 Scientific Workshops, May 22-26, 2017, ACM: Cologne, Germany, pp. 1-4. 4. Laanti, M. (2017) Agile Transformation Model for Large Software Development Organizations. In: Proceedings of the XP2017 Scientific Workshops, May 22-26, 2017, ACM: Cologne, Germany, pp. 1-5. 5. Koehnemann, H. and Mayner, S. (2017) SAFe for Government observations from the 2017 SAFe Summit, [online] available at: [Accessed 25 November 2017]. 6. Joslin, R. and Müller, R. (2015) “Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 33, No. 6, pp. 1377-1392. 7. Hoda, R. and Noble, J. (2017) Becoming Agile: A Grounded Theory of Agile Transitions in Practice. In: Proceedings of 2017 IEEE/ACM 39th International Conference on Software Engineering, May 20-28, 2017, ACM/IEEE: Buenos Aires, Argentina, pp. 141-151 8. Gurd, B. and Ifandoudas, P. (2014) “Moving towards agility: the contribution of a modified balanced scorecard system”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 18, N0. 2, pp. 1-13. 9. Gren, L., Torkar, R. and Feldt, R. (2017) “Group development and group maturity when building agile teams: A qualitative and quantitative investigation at eight large companies”, The Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 124, No. 2, pp. 104-119 10. PaterekPawe(2017) agile transformation in project organization – issues, conditions and challenges Project Management Development – Practice and Perspectives Sixth International Scientific Conference on Project Management in the Baltic Countries April 27-28, 2017, Riga, University of Latvia ISSN 2256-0513, e-ISSN 2501-0263 11. Cegarra-Navarro, J.-G., Soto-Acosta, P. and Wensley, A.K.P. (2016) “Structured knowledge processes and firm performance: The role of organizational agility”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69, No. 5, pp. 1544-1549. 12. Dikert, K., Paasivaara, M. and Lassenius, C. (2016) “Challenges and success factors for large-scale agile transformations: A systematic literature review”, The Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 119, No. 9, pp. 87- 108. 13. Czakon, W. ed. (2015) Podstawy Metodologii Badań w naukach o zarządzaniu, Wolters Kluwer, Warszawa, PL. Denning, S. (2016a) “How to make the whole organization ‘Agile'’”, Strategy & Leadership, 44 (4), pp. 10-17. Denning, S. (2016b) “Agile’s ten implementation challenges'', Strategy & Leadership, 44(5), pp. 15-20. 14. Gandomani, T.J., Zulzalil, H., Ghani, A.A.A., Sultan, A.B.M. (2013) “Towards Comprehensive and Disciplined Change Management Strategy in Agile Transformation Process”, Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 6, No. 13, pp. 2345-2351. 15. Solinski, A. and Petersen, K. (2016) “Prioritizing agile benefits and limitations in relation to practice usage”, Software Quality Journal, Vol. 24, No. 2, pp. 447-482. 16. Malik, R. S., Ahmad, S. S., & Hussain, M. T. H. (2019, March). A review of agile methodology in IT projects. In Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Advanced Computing and Software Engineering (ICACSE). 17. Hayat, F., Rehman, A. U., Arif, K. S., Wahab, K., & Abbas, M. (2019, July). The influence of agile methodology (Scrum) on software project management. In 2019 20th IEEE/ACIS International Conference on Software Engineering, Artificial Intelligence, Networking and Parallel/Distributed Computing (SNPD) (pp. 145-149). IEEE. 18. Mas, A., Mesquida, A. L., & Pacheco, M. (2020). Supporting the deployment of ISO-based project management processes with agile metrics. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 70, 103405. 19. Thesing, T., Feldmann, C., & Burchardt, M. (2021). Agile versus waterfall project management: decision model for selecting the appropriate approach to a project. Procedia Computer Science, 181, 746-756. 20. Venkatesh, V., Rai, A., & Maruping, L. M. (2018). Information systems projects and individual developer outcomes: Role of project managers and process control. Information systems research, 29(1), 127-148.