采用规模化敏捷框架的问题

P. Ciancarini, A. Kruglov, W. Pedrycz, Dilshat Salikhov, G. Succi
{"title":"采用规模化敏捷框架的问题","authors":"P. Ciancarini, A. Kruglov, W. Pedrycz, Dilshat Salikhov, G. Succi","doi":"10.1145/3510457.3513028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Agile methods were originally introduced for small sized, colocated teams. Their successful products immediately brought up the issue of adapting the methods also for large and distributed organizations engaged in projects to build major, complex products. Currently the most popular multi-teams agile method is the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) which, however, is subject to criticism: it appears to be quite demanding and expensive in terms of human resource and project management practices. Moreover, SAFe allegedly goes against some of the principles of agility. This research attempts to gather a deeper understanding of the matter first reviewing and analysing the studies published on this topic via a multivocal literature review and then with an extended empirical investigation on the matters that appear most controversial via the direct analysis of the work of 25 respondents from 17 different companies located in eight countries. Thus, the originality of this research is in the systemic assessment of the “level of flexibility” of SAFe, highlighting the challenges of adopting this framework as it relates to decision making, structure, and the technical and managerial competencies of the company. The results show that SAFe can be an effective and adequate approach if the company is ready to invest a significant effort and resources into it both in the form of providing time for SAFe to be properly absorbed and specific training for individuals.","PeriodicalId":119790,"journal":{"name":"2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP)","volume":"117 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Issues in the Adoption of the Scaled Agile Framework\",\"authors\":\"P. Ciancarini, A. Kruglov, W. Pedrycz, Dilshat Salikhov, G. Succi\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/3510457.3513028\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Agile methods were originally introduced for small sized, colocated teams. Their successful products immediately brought up the issue of adapting the methods also for large and distributed organizations engaged in projects to build major, complex products. Currently the most popular multi-teams agile method is the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) which, however, is subject to criticism: it appears to be quite demanding and expensive in terms of human resource and project management practices. Moreover, SAFe allegedly goes against some of the principles of agility. This research attempts to gather a deeper understanding of the matter first reviewing and analysing the studies published on this topic via a multivocal literature review and then with an extended empirical investigation on the matters that appear most controversial via the direct analysis of the work of 25 respondents from 17 different companies located in eight countries. Thus, the originality of this research is in the systemic assessment of the “level of flexibility” of SAFe, highlighting the challenges of adopting this framework as it relates to decision making, structure, and the technical and managerial competencies of the company. The results show that SAFe can be an effective and adequate approach if the company is ready to invest a significant effort and resources into it both in the form of providing time for SAFe to be properly absorbed and specific training for individuals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":119790,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP)\",\"volume\":\"117 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/3510457.3513028\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3510457.3513028","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

敏捷方法最初是为小型的、分布在一起的团队引入的。他们成功的产品立即提出了一个问题,即将这些方法也适用于大型和分布式的组织,这些组织从事于构建主要的、复杂的产品的项目。目前最流行的多团队敏捷方法是规模敏捷框架(SAFe),然而,它受到了批评:它在人力资源和项目管理实践方面似乎要求很高,而且成本很高。此外,外管局据称违反了一些敏捷性原则。本研究试图收集问题的更深层次的理解,首先回顾和分析发表在这个主题上的研究,通过多声文献回顾,然后通过对来自8个国家的17家不同公司的25名受访者的工作的直接分析,对最有争议的问题进行扩展的实证调查。因此,本研究的独创性在于对外管局“灵活性水平”的系统评估,突出了采用该框架所面临的挑战,因为它与公司的决策、结构、技术和管理能力有关。结果表明,如果公司愿意投入大量的精力和资源,为SAFe提供适当吸收的时间和对个人的具体培训,SAFe可以成为一种有效和充分的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Issues in the Adoption of the Scaled Agile Framework
Agile methods were originally introduced for small sized, colocated teams. Their successful products immediately brought up the issue of adapting the methods also for large and distributed organizations engaged in projects to build major, complex products. Currently the most popular multi-teams agile method is the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) which, however, is subject to criticism: it appears to be quite demanding and expensive in terms of human resource and project management practices. Moreover, SAFe allegedly goes against some of the principles of agility. This research attempts to gather a deeper understanding of the matter first reviewing and analysing the studies published on this topic via a multivocal literature review and then with an extended empirical investigation on the matters that appear most controversial via the direct analysis of the work of 25 respondents from 17 different companies located in eight countries. Thus, the originality of this research is in the systemic assessment of the “level of flexibility” of SAFe, highlighting the challenges of adopting this framework as it relates to decision making, structure, and the technical and managerial competencies of the company. The results show that SAFe can be an effective and adequate approach if the company is ready to invest a significant effort and resources into it both in the form of providing time for SAFe to be properly absorbed and specific training for individuals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Industry's Cry for Tools that Support Large-Scale Refactoring Code Reviewer Recommendation in Tencent: Practice, Challenge, and Direction* What's bothering developers in code review? The Impact of Flaky Tests on Historical Test Prioritization on Chrome Surveying the Developer Experience of Flaky Tests
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1