Get Ready for Agile Methods, with Care

By Barry W. Boehm. Computer, 2002

1,044 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Information Systems, Software

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6d2b98853aa3593ac2a662db1fbb2fdadb67b97d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Information Systems

In Software

Citations in the corpus

Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review (2008, background): “Thus, consistent with recommendations provided by others [11, 12, 15], we suggest that practitioners carefully study”
Empirical Findings in Agile Methods (2002, background): “For this eWorkshop, Barry Boehm’s January 2002 IEEE Computer article [3] and the Agile Manifesto [11-13] served as background material.”
The situational factors that affect the software development process: Towards a comprehensive reference framework (2012, background): “However, agile methods also suffer a number of criticisms, including that they may only be suited to small software development teams [30] and that they may require premium software engineers [30], [31].”
Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis (2017, background): “Boehm (2002) analyses the agile and process-oriented methodologies or plandriven as he calls them.”
Value-based software engineering: reinventing (2003, background): “Further discussion of these issues is provided in [7].”
Customising agile methods to software practices at Intel Shannon (2006, methodology): “European Journal of Information Systems (2006) 15, 200–213. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000605 Keywords: agile methods; software development; XP; Scrum; method tailoring; method engineering; Intel Introduction Agile methods are perhaps the latest initiative in the software field to be posited as the…”
Does Agile work? - A quantitative analysis of agile project success (2015, background): “This transformation was only completed for projects where this would result in execution planning effort being N 20% of planning phase effort since Agile projects are assumed to have a material amount of planning in the execution phase (Boehm, 2002; Coram and Bohner, 2005; Mann and Maurer, 2005; Smi”
Agile and adaptive governance in crisis response: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic (2020, neutral): “effects can be evaluated early and used for further improvements (Boehm, 2002).”
New directions on agile methods: a comparative analysis (2003, background): “In development work, accordingly, development groups concentrate only on the functions needed immediately, delivering them fast, collecting feedback and reacting rapidly to business and technology changes [7-9].”
Continuous software engineering: A roadmap and agenda (2017, methodology): “Continuous compliance and continuous security Agile methods were initially seen as suited to small projects with o-located developers in non-safety critical contexts (Ambler, 2001; oehm, 2002).”
Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies (2005, methodology): “At the present time, there is little evidence to suggest that agile principles will work in the absence of competent and above-average people [1, 2].”
Coevolving Systems and the Organization of Agile Software Development (2009, background): “Some agile advocates also consider agile and plan-driven software development methods to be polar opposites (Boehm 2002).”