skip to main content
10.1145/3613372.3613398acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagessbesConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Hybrid Software Development with Scrum: Perceptions of Brazilian Software Practitioners

Published:25 September 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Software processes are crucial in software development projects, affecting product quality and developer team productivity. Agile and plan-oriented approaches can be used in the same project, leading to hybrid software development approaches.Some studies propose hybrid strategies or attempt to characterize and identify related practices. As cultural and organizational factors may impact hybrid process adoption and enactment this paper presents a survey conducted in the Brazilian software industry to investigate various aspects of software process hybridization, using Scrum as a base. Scrum is a flexible and frequently customized agile approach, offering several software process hybridization possibilities. We collected responses from 76 participants across different states in Brazil, and our findings reveal that definitions of software process hybridization differ between industry and literature. Furthermore, we found that several hybridization alternatives are being employed to meet deadlines, manage software complexity, and satisfy customers needs, among other reasons. By sharing our findings, we hope to contribute to the field by establishing a common understanding of software hybridization goals and challenges, ultimately leading to a shared understanding of the benefits of its application, helping Brazilian companies’ productivity.

References

  1. Pierre Bourque and Richard E Fairley. 2014. SWEBOK: guide to the software engineering body of knowledge. IEEE Computer Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sungdeok Cha, Richard N Taylor, and Kyochul Kang. 2019. Handbook of software engineering. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Digital.ai. 2021. 15th Annual State Of Agile Report. Technical Report. Digital.ai. https://digital.ai/resource-center/analyst-reports/state-of-agile-report [Accessed on May 10].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Michael Felderer, Dietmar Winkler, and Stefan Biffl. 2017. Hybrid Software and System Development in Practice: Initial Results from Austria. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69926-4_33Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Ridewaan Hanslo and Ernest Mnkandla. 2018. Scrum Adoption Challenges Detection Model: SACDM. 949–957. https://doi.org/10.15439/2018F270Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Mark Kasunic. 2005. Designing an effective survey. Technical Report. Carnegie-Mellon Univ Pittsburgh PA Software Engineering Inst. https://doi.org/10.1184/R1/6573062.v1Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Barbara A. Kitchenham and Shari L. Pfleeger. 2008. Personal Opinion Surveys. Springer London, London, 63–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-044-5_3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Jil Klünder, Regina Hebig, and et al.2019. Catching up with Method and Process Practice: An Industry-Informed Baseline for Researchers(ICSE-SEIP ’19). IEEE Press, 255–264. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2019.00036Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Jil Klünder, Melanie Busch, and et al.2021. Towards Shaping the Software Lifecycle with Methods and Practices. In 2021 IEEE/ACM Joint 15th International Conference on Software and System Processes (ICSSP) and 16th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE). 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSP-ICGSE52873.2021.00010Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Jil Klünder, Hohl Philipp, and et al.2017. HELENA Study: Reasons for Combining Agile and Traditional Software Development Approaches in German Companies. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69926-4_32Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Marco Kuhrmann, Philipp Diebold, and et al.2019. Hybrid Software Development Approaches in Practice: A European Perspective. IEEE Software 36, 4 (2019), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2018.110161245Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Marco Kuhrmann, Jil Klünder, and et al.2017. Hybrid Software and System Development in Practice: Waterfall, Scrum, and Beyond. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Software and System Process (Paris, France) (ICSSP 2017). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 30–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3084100.3084104Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Marco Kuhrmann, Paolo Tell, and et al.2022. What Makes Agile Software Development Agile?IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 48, 9 (2022), 3523–3539. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2021.3099532Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Joyce Kanagwa Nabende Nakatumba and et al.2017. Hybrid Software and Systems Development in Practice: Perspectives from Sweden and Uganda. International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69926-4_30Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Michael Neumann. 2022. The Integrated List of Agile Practices - A Tertiary Study. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing 438 LNBIP (2022), 19 – 37. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94238-0_2 Cited by: 3; All Open Access, Green Open Access.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Nicolás Paez, Diego Fontdevila, and Alejandro Oliveros. 2017. HELENA Study: Initial Observations of Software Development Practices in Argentina.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Saniav Pandit Patil and Jitesh R. Neve. 2018. Productivity Improvement of Software Development Process Through Scrumban: A Practitioner’s Approach. In 2018 International Conference On Advances in Communication and Computing Technology (ICACCT). 314–318. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICACCT.2018.8529405Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Chontipan Plengvittaya and Davit Sanpote. 2018. Scrumban for teaching at undergraduate program: A case study from software engineering students, University of Phayao, Thailand. In 2018 International Conference on Digital Arts, Media and Technology (ICDAMT). 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDAMT.2018.8376505Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Nils Prenner. 2020. Towards Improving the Organization of Hybrid Development Approaches. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Processes (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (ICSSP ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 185–188. https://doi.org/10.1145/3379177.3390304Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Roger S Pressman and Bruce R Maxim. 2016. Software engineering: A professional approach. McGraw-Hill Science, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Carlos E Salgado, Juliana Teixeira, Nuno Santos, Ricardo J Machado, and Rita S. P Maciel. 2015. A SoaML approach for derivation of a process-oriented logical architecture from use cases. In Exploring Services Science: 6th International Conference, IESS 2015, Porto, Portugal, February 4-6, 2015, Proceedings 6. Springer, 80–94.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. M.N. Sarpiri and T.J. Gandomani. 2021. A case study of using the hybrid model of scrum and six sigma in software development. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering 11, 6 (2021), 5342–5350. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v11i6.pp5342-5350 cited By 4.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Ian Sommerville, Martin Fowler, Kent Beck, John Brant, William Opdyke, and Don Roberts. 2019. Software Engineering. Pearson; 10 edition (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Paolo Tell, Jil Klünder, and et al.2019. What Are Hybrid Development Methods Made of? An Evidence-Based Characterization. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Processes (Montreal, Quebec, Canada) (ICSSP ’19). IEEE Press, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSP.2019.00022Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Christiaan Verwijs and Daniel Russo. 2023. A Theory of Scrum Team Effectiveness. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 32, 3, Article 74 (apr 2023), 51 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3571849Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Leo R. Vijayasarathy and Charles W. Butler. 2016. Choice of Software Development Methodologies: Do Organizational, Project, and Team Characteristics Matter?IEEE Software 33, 5 (2016), 86–94. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2015.26Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Dave West, Mike Gilpin, Tom Grant, and Alissa Anderson. 2011. Water-scrum-fall is the reality of agile for most organizations today. Forrester Research 26, 2011 (2011), 1–17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Claes Wohlin, Per Runeson, Martin Höst, Magnus C Ohlsson, Björn Regnell, and Anders Wesslén. 2012. Experimentation in software engineering. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29044-2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Rafał Włodarski, Jean-Remy Falleri, and Corinne Parvéry. 2021. Assessment of a Hybrid Software Development Process for Student Projects: A Controlled Experiment. In 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering Education and Training (ICSE-SEET). 289–299. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE-SEET52601.2021.00039Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Hybrid Software Development with Scrum: Perceptions of Brazilian Software Practitioners

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            SBES '23: Proceedings of the XXXVII Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering
            September 2023
            570 pages
            ISBN:9798400707872
            DOI:10.1145/3613372

            Copyright © 2023 ACM

            Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM acknowledges that this contribution was authored or co-authored by an employee, contractor or affiliate of a national government. As such, the Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free right to publish or reproduce this article, or to allow others to do so, for Government purposes only.

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 25 September 2023

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article
            • Research
            • Refereed limited

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate147of427submissions,34%
          • Article Metrics

            • Downloads (Last 12 months)58
            • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9

            Other Metrics

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader

          HTML Format

          View this article in HTML Format .

          View HTML Format