<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
Discussions on agile software development methodologies have a tendency to develop into an argument between proponents of agile methods and proponents of more traditional process-oriented methodologies. The terminology used in these debates is often unhelpful, and in many cases are inaccurate and biased representations. It needs to be accepted that there are no “silver bullets” providing universal solutions (Jeffries, 2001). Bearing this in mind, the decision to adopt a particular software development methodology is a difficult one, and the decision to choose an agile method is no exception. In theory, as in practice, definitions and descriptions of the various agile methods are presented, yet the factors considered in the decision to adopt, or not adopt, an agile method are not addressed. While agile methodologies try to avoid the excessive use of procedures or tools (Beck & Fowler, 2001), one agile methodology, dynamic systems development method (DSDM), does recommend the use of appropriate tools during the development process (Coesmans, 2003). However, it appears that none of the available agile methodologies suggest a tool to assist decision makers at the project initiation phase, therefore, the debate on agile suitability is usually a debate on agile versus traditional methods (DeMarco & Boehm, 2002), rather than an examination of the suitability of agile methods for a particular project. While the “agile debate” rages, individual projects are not adequately assessed prior to the adoption of a method.
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |