Creating a dual-agility method: The value of method engineering

Journal of Database Management

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 1-23

  Henderson Sellers, B ^a   Serour, M K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Action research; Agile methods; Dual agility methods; Metamodeling; Method engineering; Software process improvement; The OPEN Process Framework

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; METADATA; PROCESS CONTROL; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

ACTION RESEARCH; AGILE METHOD; DUAL-AGILITY METHOD; METAMODELING; METHOD ENGINEERING; SOFTWARE PROCESS IMPROVEMENT; THE OPEN PROCESS FRAMEWORK;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 27144560202     PISSN: 10638016     EISSN: 10638016     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/jdm.2005100101     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Abrahamsson, P., Warsta, J., Siponen, M. T., & Ronkainen, J. (2003). New directions on agile methods: A comparative analysis. In Proceedings of ICSE '03, (pp. 244-254). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
2. Ambler, S. (2003). Agile database techniques. J. Wiley & Sons.
3. Argyris, C., Putnam, R., & Smith, D. M. (1985). Action science: Concepts, methods and skills for research and investigation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publisher.
4. Avison, D. E., Lau, F., Myers, M., & Nielsen, P. A. (1999). Making academic research more relevant. Communications of the ACM, 42(1), 94-97.
5. Aydin, M. N., Harmsen, F., van Slooten, K., & Stegwee, R. A. (2004). Appropriate delivery of advice and guidance on method adaptation. In Proceedings of AMCIS 2004.
6. Bajec, M., Krisper, M., & Rupnik, R. (2004). The scenario for constructing flexible, people-focused systems development methodologies. In Proceedings of ECIS 2004.
7. Beck, K. (2000). Extreme programming explained. Addison-Wesley.
8. Beck, K., & Boehm, B. (2003). Agility through discipline: A debate. IEEE Computer, 36(6), 4446.
9. Bettin, J. (2003). Practicalities of implementing component-based development and model-driven architecture. In Process Engineering for Object-Oriented and Component-Based Development: Proceedings of OOPSLA 2003 Workshop, Sydney, Australia (pp. 19-30).
10. Brinkkemper, S. (1996). Method engineering: Engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Information Software Technology, 38(4), 275-280.
11. Brinkkemper, S., Saeki, M., & Harmsen, F. (1999). Meta-modelling based assembly techniques for situational method engineering. Information Systems, 24(3), 209-228.
12. Chau, T., Maurer, F., & Melnik, G.(2003).Knowledge sharing: Agile methods vs. Tayloristic methods. In Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE '03), (pp. 302-307). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
13. Cockburn, A. (2000). Selecting a project's methodology. IEEE Software, 17(4), 64-71.
14. Cockburn, A. (2002). An interview with Alistair. The Cutter Consortium. Retrieved on February 23, 2004, from http://www.cutter.com/consultants/ cockburna.html
15. Cockburn, A. (2003). The Cutter Consortium. Retrieved April 7, 2003, from http://www.cutter.com/consultants/cockburna.html
16. Constantine, L. (2002, August-September). Non-skid agility? Information Age, 34-42.
17. Constantine, L. L., & Lockwood, L. A. D. (1994). One size does not fit all: Fitting practices to people. American Programmer, 7(12), 30-38.
18. Constantine, L. L., & Lockwood, L. A. D. (1999). Software for use. Addison-Wesley.
19. Elden, M., & Chisholm, R. F. (1993). Emerging varieties of action research: Introduction to the special issue. Human Relations, 46(2), 121-142.
20. Firesmith & Henderson-Sellers. (2002). The OPEN process framework: An introduction. Addison-Wesley.
21. Fowler, M. (2002). The new methodology. Retrieved from http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/newMethodology.html
22. Gonzalez-Perez, C., McBride, T., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (in press). A metamodel for assessable software development methodologies. Software Quality Journal.
23. Graham, I., Henderson-Sellers, B., & Younessi, H. (1997). The OPEN process specification. Addison-Wesley.
24. Henderson-Sellers. (2002). Agile or rigorous OO methodologies: Getting the best of both worlds. Cutter IT Journal, 15(1), 25-33.
25. Henderson-Sellers, B. (2003). Method engineering for OO system development. Communications of the ACM, 46(10), 73-78.
26. Henderson-Sellers, B., Haire, B., & Lowe, D. (2002). Using OPEN's deontic matrices for e-business. InC. Rolland, S. Brinkkemper, & M. Saeki (Eds.), Engineering information systems in the Internet context (pp. 9-30). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
27. Henderson-Sellers, B., & Hutchison, J. (2003). Usage-centered design (UCD) and the OPEN process framework (OPF). In L.L. Constantine (Ed.), Performance by Design: Proceedings for USE2003, Second International Conference on Usage-Centered Design, (pp. 171-196). Rowley, MA: Ampersand Press.
28. Henninger, S., Ivaturi, A., Nuli, K., & Thirunavukkaras, A. (2002). Supporting adaptable methodologies to meet evolving project needs. In Proceedings of the First ICSE Workshop on Iterative, Adaptive, and Agile Processes, Orlando, FL., May 25.
29. Highsmith, J. A. (2000). Adaptive software development: A collaboration approach to managing complex systems. Dorset House.
30. Hult, M., & Lennung, S. (1980). Towards a definition of action research: A note and bibliography. Journal of Management Studies, 17(2), 241-250.
31. Jalote, P. (2002). Lessons learned in framework-based software process improvement. In Proceedings of the Ninth Asia-Pacific Conference on Software Engineering, APSEC2002, (pp. 261-268). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
32. Jarke, M., Pohl, K., Weidenhaupt, K., & Lyytinen, K. (1998). Meta modeling: A formal basis for interoperability and adaptability. InB. Krämer & M. Papazoglou (Eds.), Information systems interoperability (pp. 229-263). John Wiley Research Science Press.
33. Kerievsky, J. (2001). Continuous learning. In Proceedings of XP2001. Retrieved from http://www.xp2003.org/conference/papers/Chapter1-Kerievsky.pdf
34. Kerth, N. L. (2001). Project retrospectives: A handbook for team reviews. New York: Dorset House.
35. Kumar, K., & Welke, R. J. (1992). Methodology engineering: A proposal for situation-specific methodology construction. In W. W. Cotterman & J. A. Senn (Eds.), Challenges and strategies for research in systems development(pp. 257-269). Chichester: J. Wiley.
36. Lau, F. (1999). Toward a framework for action research in information systems studies. Information Technology and People, 12(2), 148-175.
37. Lewin, K. (1974). Frontiers in group dynamics I. Concepts, method and reality in social sciences: Social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1, 5-41.
38. Lindvall, M. et al. (2002). Empirical findings in agile methods. In Extreme Programming and Agile Methods, XP/Agile Universe 2002: Proceedings of the Second XP Universe and First Agile Universe Conference, 197-207.
39. Lyytinen, K. et al. (1994). MetaPHOR: Metamodeling, principles, hypertext, objects and repositories (technical report no. TR-7). Finland: University of Jyväskylä, Department of Computer Science and Information Systems.
40. MacIsaac, B. (2003). An overview of the RUP as a process engineering platform. In Process Engineering for Object-Oriented and Component-Based Development: Proceedings of OOPSLA 2003 Workshop, (pp. 43-52).
41. Newkirk, J. (2002). Introduction to agile processes and extreme programming. In Proceedings of ICSE '02, (pp. 695-696).
42. Nguyen, V.P., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (2003). Towards automated support for method engineering with the OPEN approach. In Proceedings of the Seventh IASTED International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications, (pp. 691-696).
43. Noll, J. (2003). Flexible process enactment using low-fidelity models. In Proceedings of the Seventh IASTED International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications, (pp. 675-680). Anaheim, CA: ACTA Press.
44. OMG. (2001). OMG unified modelling language specification, version 1.4 (OMG documents formal/01-09-68 through 80). Retrieved on July 12, 2002, from http://www.omg.org
45. OMG. (2002). Software process engineering metamodel specification, version 1.0 (OMG document formal/02-11-14).
46. Opperthauser, D. (2003, September). Defect management in an agile development environment. Crosstalk Journal of Defense Software Engineering.
47. Rainer, A., & Hall, T. (2002). Key success factors for implementing software process improvement: A maturity-based analysis. Journal of Systems and Software, 62(2), 71-84.
48. Ralyté, J. (1999). Reusing scenario based approaches in requirement engineering methods: CREWS method base. In Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications (DEXA '99) and the First International Workshop on the Requirements Engineering Process: Innovative Techniques, Models, Tools to Support the RE Process (REP'99), Florence, Italy, September 1-3 (pp. 305-309). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
49. Ralyté, J., & Rolland, C. (2001). An assembly process model for method engineering. In Proceedings of CAiSE 2001, (pp. 267-283). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
50. Rapoport, R. (1970). Three dilemmas in action research. Human Relations, 23(4), 499-513.
51. Reason, P. (1993). Three approaches to participative inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 324-339). London: Sage Publications.
52. Reifer, D. J., Maurer, F., & Erdogmus, H. (2003). Scaling agile methods. IEEE Software, 20(4), 12-14.
53. Rolland, C., Prakash, N., & Benjamen, A. (1999). A multi-model view of process modelling. Requirements Engineering Journal, 4(4), 169-187.
54. Saeki, M. (2003). CAME: The first step to automated software engineering. In Process Engineering for Object-Oriented and Component-Based Development: Proceedings of OOPSLA 2003 Workshop, Sydney, Australia (pp. 7-18).
55. Serour, M. K. (2003). The effect of intra-organisational factors on the organisational transition to object technology. Doctoral dissertation, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
56. Serour, M. K., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (2004a). Empowering a software development team with a new methodology: A case study of e-government in Australia. In Proceedings of IBIMA, Amman, Jordan, July 4-6.
57. Serour, M. K., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (2004b). Introducing agility: A case study of situational method engineering using the OPEN process framework. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference: COMPSAC 2004, (pp. 50-55). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
58. Serour, M. K., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (2004c). OPEN for agility: An action research study of introducing method engineering into a government sector. In O. Vasilecas, A. Caplinskas, W. Wojtkowski, J. Zupanic, & S. Wrycza (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Information Systems Development: Advances in Theory, Practice and Education, Vilnius, Lithuania (pp. 105-116).
59. Serour, M. K., & Henderson-Sellers, B. (2004d). Organizational aspects of transformation to e-business: A case study. In P. Isaias, P. Kommers, & M. McPherson (Eds.), Proceedings of IADIS International Conference e-Society 2004, 2, (pp. 751-758). IADIS Press.
60. Serour, M., Henderson-Sellers, B., Hughes, J., Winder, D., & Chow, L. (2002). Organizational transition to object technology: Theory and practice. In Z. Bellahsène, D. Patel, & C. Rolland (Eds.), Object-oriented information systems (pp. 229-241). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
61. Siau, K. (1999). Information modeling and method engineering: A psychological perspective. Journal of Database Management, 10(4), 44-50.
62. Skowronski, V. (2004). Do agile methods marginalize problem solvers? IEEE Computer, 37(10), 118-120.
63. Stallinger, F., Dorling, A., Rout, T., Henderson-Sellers, B., & Lefever, B. (2002). Software process improvement for component-based software engineering: An introduction to the OOSPICE project. In Proceedings of Euromicro 2002 Conference, (pp. 318-323). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
64. Susman, G. I., & Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(4), 582-603.
65. Taylor, F. (1998). The principles of scientific management. Dover Publications.
66. TerHofstede, A. H. M., & Verhoef, T. F. (1997). On the feasibility of situational method engineering. Information Systems, 22, 401-422.
67. Tolvanen, J.-P. (1998). Incremental method engineering with modeling tools: Theoretical principles and empirical evidence. Doctoral dissertation, University of Jyväskylä, Finland.
68. Tolvanen, J.-P., Rossi, M., & Liu, H. (1996). Method engineering: Current research directions and implications for future research. In S. Brinkkemper, K. Lyytinen, & R. Welke (Eds.), Method engineering, principles of method construction and support (pp. 296-317). London: Chapman-Hall.
69. Turk, D., France, R., & Rumpe, B. (in press). Assumptions underlying agile software development processes. Journal of Database Management, 16(4).