-------- Forwarded Message --------
Calls for Papers (special): International Journal of Information
Technologies and Systems Approach (IJITSA)
https://www.igi-global.com/calls-for-papers-special/international-journal-information-technologies-systems/1098
Special Issue On: Discipline-Agility Balance for Software-System
Development Methods
Submission Due Date
8/13/2019
Guest Editors
Prof. Rory O’Connor, Dublin City University, Ireland
Prof. Alena Buchalcevova, University of Economics, Czech Republic
Prof. Manuel Mora, Autonomous University of Aguascalientes, Mexico
Prof. Jorge Marx Gómez, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg,
Germany
Introduction
While Agile Software-System Development methods (such as Scrum,
XP) have
permeated in the Software Engineering academic and professional
communities in the last 10 years (Hoda et al., 2018), they have
been also
criticized for trying of using them in all kind of software
engineering
projects (Boehm, 2002; Meyer, 2018) and by their large learning
curve to
be mastered (Ganesh & Thangasamy, 2012). Even inventors of the
main agile
methodologies have indicated subtly that agile methods do not
imply
easiness of utilization. For instance, Beck (1999; chapter 24)
reported
“XP is simple in its details, but it is hard to execute”.
Similarly,
Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland (2017; p. 3) “SCRUM is: lightweight,
simple
to understand, (but) difficult to master”.
Additionally, while some studies (Schwaber, K., & Beedle,
2002; Holvitie
et al., 2018) have reported that agile software-system development
methods
help to reduce the negative effects of technical debts, other
studies have
also reported (Schwanke et al., 2013; Guo et al., 2016) that agile
software-system development methods are prone to introduce
technical debts
by “an emphasis on quick delivery and architecture and design
issues”
(Behutiye et al. 2017; p. 154).
Consequently, balanced discipline-agility methods and approaches
have been
proposed by researchers (Boehm & Turner, 2004;
Rodriguez-Martinez et al.,
2012) and some particular adaptations (maturity models, scalation
models,
enhancement models) to agile methods have been also explored
(Boehm &
Turner, 2005; Campanelli & Parreiras, 2015; Galvan-Cruz et
al., 2017;
Özcan-Top & Demirors, 2019; Dingsøyr et al., 2018; 2019).
Furthermore, new
ISO/IEC standards like the ISO/IEC 29110 standard, pursue similar
aims
(Munoz et al., 2018; O'Connor, 2019).
However, because both software engineering approaches relies in
very
separate assumptions, their straight integration is not a trivial
task
(Siau et al., 2015). We hypothesize that in the spectrum of types
of
software engineering projects, some can be better addressed with
disciplined methods, others can be better with agile ones, but
others can
take advantages of balanced ones.
Furthermore, the high dynamic context of the software-system
customer
demands and the emergence of highly related information technology
and
innovations such as cloud computing (Younas et al., 2018),
internet of
things (Jacobson et al., 2017), microservices architecture
(Pautasso et
al., 2017), and DevOps approach (Dingsøyr, T., & Lassenius,
2016) claim
for a reconsideration of the adequate utilization of disciplined
vs agile
vs balanced software-system development methods.
Nevertheless, these concerns have been few explored. Thus, in this
special
issue we call for conceptual frameworks which help to clarify the
theoretical foundations of balanced methods, as well as empirical
cases
(exploratory and confirmatory ones) where evidence on success or
learned
lessons on failed cases of these balanced methods be reported.
REFERENCES
Boehm, B. (2002). Get ready for agile methods, with care.
Computer, 35(1),
64-69.
Boehm, B., & Turner, R. (2004, May). Balancing agility and
discipline:
Evaluating and integrating agile and plan-driven methods. In
Software
Engineering, 2004. ICSE 2004. Proceedings. 26th International
Conference
on (pp. 718-719). IEEE.
Boehm, B., & Turner, R. (2005). Management challenges to
implementing
agile processes in traditional development organizations. IEEE
software,
22(5), 30-39.
Beck, K. (1999). Extreme Programming Explained. Addison-Wesley
(digital
version).
Behutiye, W. N., Rodríguez, P., Oivo, M., & Tosun, A. (2017).
Analyzing
the concept of technical debt in the context of agile software
development: A systematic literature review. Information and
Software
Technology, 82, 139-158.
Campanelli, A. S., & Parreiras, F. S. (2015). Agile methods
tailoring–A
systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software,
110,
85-100.
Dingsøyr, T., Moe, N. B., Fægri, T. E., & Seim, E. A. (2018).
Exploring
software development at the very large-scale: a revelatory case
study and
research agenda for agile method adaptation. Empirical Software
Engineering, 23(1), 490-520.
Dingsøyr, T., & Lassenius, C. (2016). Emerging themes in agile
software
development: Introduction to the special section on continuous
value
delivery. Information and Software Technology, 77, 56-60.
Dingsøyr, T., Falessi, D., & Power, K. (2019). Agile
Development at Scale:
The Next Frontier. arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.00324.
Galván-Cruz, S., Mora, M., & O’Connor, R. (2017, October). A
Means-Ends
Design of SCRUM+: an agile-disciplined balanced SCRUM enhanced
with the
ISO/IEC 29110 Standard. In International Conference on Software
Process
Improvement (pp. 13-23). Springer, Cham.
Ganesh, N. & Thangasamy, S. (2012). Lessons learned in
transforming from
traditional to agile development. Journal of Computer Science,
vol. 8, pp.
389-392.
Guo, Y., Spínola, R. O., & Seaman, C. (2016). Exploring the
costs of
technical debt management–a case study. Empirical Software
Engineering,
21(1), 159-182.
Hoda, R., Salleh, N., & Grundy, J. (2018). The rise and
evolution of agile
software development. IEEE Software, 35(5), 58-63.
Holvitie, J., Licorish, S. A., Spínola, R. O., Hyrynsalmi, S.,
MacDonell,
S. G., Mendes, T. S., ... & Leppänen, V. (2018). Technical
debt and agile
software development practices and processes: An industry
practitioner
survey. Information and Software Technology, 96, 141-160.
Jacobson, I., Spence, I., & Ng, P. W. (2017). Is there a
single method for
the Internet of Things?. Communications of the ACM, 60(11), 46-53.
Meyer, B. (2018). Making Sense of Agile Methods. IEEE Software,
(2), 91-94.
Muñoz, M., Mejia, J., & Laporte, C. Y. (2018, October).
Reinforcing very
small entities using agile methodologies with the ISO/IEC 29110.
In
International Conference on Software Process Improvement (pp.
88-98).
Springer, Cham.
O'Connor, R. V. (2019). Software Development Process Standards for
Very
Small Companies. In Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in
Digital
Marketing and Entrepreneurship (pp. 681-694). IGI Global.
Özcan-Top, Ö., & Demirors, O. (2019). Application of a
software agility
assessment model–AgilityMod in the field. Computer Standards &
Interfaces,
62, 1-16.
Pautasso, C., Zimmermann, O., Amundsen, M., Lewis, J., &
Josuttis, N. M.
(2017). Microservices in Practice, Part 1: Reality Check and
Service
Design. IEEE Software, 34(1), 91-98.
Rodríguez-Martínez, L., Mora, M., Álvarez, F., Garza, L., Durán,
H., &
Muñoz, J. (2012). Review of Relevant System Development Life
Cycles
(SDLCs) in Service-Oriented Software Engineering (SoSE). Journal
of
applied research and technology, 10(2), 94-113.
Siau, K., Chiang, R., & Hardgrave, B. C. (2015). The
Application of
Cognitive Complexity Principles for Reconciling the Agile and the
Discipline Approaches. In Systems Analysis and Design: People,
Processes,
and Projects (pp. 25-42). Routledge.
Schwanke, R., Lu Xiao, & Yuanfang Cai. (2013). Measuring
architecture
quality by structure plus history analysis. Software Engineering
(ICSE),
2013 35th International Conference on, 891–900.
Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2002). Agile software development
with Scrum
(Vol. 1). Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.
Schwaber, K., & Sutherland, J. (2017). The Scrum Guide™ - The
Definitive
Guide to Scrum: The Rules of the Game. Online available at:
https://www.scrumguides.org
Younas, M., Jawawi, D. N., Ghani, I., Fries, T., & Kazmi, R.
(2018). Agile
development in the cloud computing environment: A systematic
review.
Information and Software Technology.
Objective
This special issue pursues to improve our theoretical academic and
professional applied knowledge on the convergence of disciplined
and agile
software-system development methodologies in a balanced way, as
well as on
their specific contexts for being applied separately.
Recommended Topics
• Conceptual foundations on the disciplined vs agile
software-system
development methodologies
• Conceptual frameworks on the disciplined vs agile
software-system
development methodologies
• Comparative reviews of disciplined vs agile software-system
development
methodologies
• Comparative reviews of specific phases (Requirements,
Architecture,
Design, Build, Test, Deployment) in the disciplined vs agile
software-system development methodologies
• Analysis of specific suitable domains for disciplined vs agile
software-system development methodologies (e-commerce, industry
4.0,
analytics, education, healthcare, financial)
• Analysis of specific suitable platforms for disciplined vs agile
software-system development methodologies (desktop, mobile,
client-server,
cloud)
• Emergent ICT technologies (cloud, internet of things), and
approaches
(microservices architecture, DevOps) and balanced methodologies
• Case studies on disciplined vs agile software-system development
methodologies
• Survey studies on disciplined vs agile software-system
development
methodologies
• Experimental studies on disciplined vs agile software-system
development
methodologies
• Simulation studies on disciplined vs agile software-system
development
methodologies
Submission Procedure
Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit papers for
this
special theme issue on Discipline-Agility Balance for
Software-System
Development Methods on or before August 31th, 2019. Prospective
authors
should note that only original and previously unpublished articles
will be
considered. INTERESTED AUTHORS MUST CONSULT THE JOURNAL’S
GUIDELINES FOR
MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSIONS at
http://www.igi-global.com/journals/guidelines-for-submission.aspx
PRIOR TO
SUBMISSION. All article submissions will be forwarded to at least
3
members of the Editorial Review Board of the journal for
double-blind,
peer review. Final decision regarding
acceptance/revision/rejection will
be based on the reviews received from the reviewers. All
submissions must
be forwarded electronically at:
http://www.igi-global.com/authorseditors/titlesubmission/newproject.aspx
All submissions and inquiries should be directed to the attention
of:
Dr. Manuel Mora, Autonomous University of Aguascalientes, Mexico
ijitsa@gmail.com
weblink to submit a Manuscript:
https://www.igi-global.com/submission/submit-manuscript/?jid=1098&cfcid=c22b3e18-dde9-470d-be17-9c7f72f66db5
_______________________________________________
AISWorld mailing list
AISWorld@lists.aisnet.org