View source for Agile software development

{{short description|Umbrella term for certain approaches to software development}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=August 2020}}
{{Software development process|Paradigms and models}}

'''Agile software development''' is an umbrella term for approaches to [[software development|developing software]] that reflect the values and principles agreed upon by ''The Agile Alliance'', a group of 17 software practitioners, in 2001.<ref>{{cite web |title=What is Agile? |url=https://www.agilealliance.org/agile101/ |website=Agile Alliance |date=29 June 2015 |access-date=16 July 2024}}</ref> As documented in their ''Manifesto for Agile Software Development'' the practitioners value:<ref name="AgileManifesto">{{cite web|author=Kent Beck|author-link=Kent Beck|author2=James Grenning|author3=Robert C. Martin|author3-link=Robert Cecil Martin|author4=Mike Beedle|author5=Jim Highsmith|author5-link=Jim Highsmith|author6=Steve Mellor|author6-link=Stephen J. Mellor|author7=Arie van Bennekum|author8=Andrew Hunt|author8-link=Andy Hunt (author)|author9=Ken Schwaber|author9-link=Ken Schwaber|year=2001|title=Manifesto for Agile Software Development|url=http://agilemanifesto.org/|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=14 June 2010|website=|publisher=Agile Alliance|author12=Jeff Sutherland|author10-link=Alistair Cockburn|author10=Alistair Cockburn|author11-link=Ron Jeffries|author11=Ron Jeffries|author13-link=Ward Cunningham|author17=Brian Marick|author16=Martin Fowler|author16-link=Martin Fowler (software engineer)|author15=Dave Thomas|author15-link=David A. Thomas (software developer)|author14=Jon Kern|author13=Ward Cunningham|author12-link=Jeff Sutherland}}</ref> 

* Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
* Working software over comprehensive documentation
* Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
* Responding to change over following a plan

The practitioners cite inspiration from new practices at the time including [[extreme programming]], [[Scrum (software development)|scrum]], [[dynamic systems development method]], [[adaptive software development]] and being sympathetic to the need for an alternative to documentation driven, heavyweight software development processes.<ref name="LarmanGuide" />

Many software development practices emerged from the agile mindset. These agile-based practices, sometimes called ''Agile'' (with a capital A)<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.rallydev.com/blog/engineering/agile-capital-vs-agile-lowercase |title=Agile With a Capital "A" Vs. agile With a Lowercase "a" |last=Rally |date=2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160105105258/https://www.rallydev.com/blog/engineering/agile-capital-vs-agile-lowercase |archive-date=5 January 2016 |url-status=unfit |access-date=9 September 2015 }}</ref> include requirements, discovery and solutions improvement through the collaborative effort of [[Self-organizing communities|self-organizing]] and [[cross-functional team|cross-functional]] teams with their [[Customer|customer(s)]]/[[End user|end user(s)]].{{sfn|Collier|2011}}<ref name="WhatIsAgile">{{cite web|url = http://www.agilealliance.org/the-alliance/what-is-agile/|title = What is Agile Software Development?|date = 8 June 2013|access-date = 4 April 2015|publisher = Agile Alliance}}</ref>

While there is much [[anecdotal evidence]] that the agile mindset and agile-based practices improve the software development process, the empirical evidence is limited and less than conclusive.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Dybå|first1=Tore|last2=Dingsøyr|first2=Torgeir|title=Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review|journal=Information and Software Technology|date=1 August 2008|volume=50|issue=9–10|pages=833–859|doi=10.1016/j.infsof.2008.01.006|s2cid=2244031 |language=en|issn=0950-5849}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lee|first1=Gwanhoo|last2=Xia|first2=Weidong|s2cid=26477249|date=2010|title=Toward Agile: An Integrated Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Field Data on Software Development Agility|journal=MIS Quarterly|volume=34|issue=1|pages=87–114|doi=10.2307/20721416|jstor=20721416}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kroll |first1=J. |last2=Richardson |first2=I. |last3=Prikladnicki |first3=R. |last4=Audy |first4=J. L. |date=2018 |title=Empirical evidence in follow the Sun software development: A systematic mapping study |url=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2017.08.011 |journal=Information and Software Technology |volume=93 |pages=30–44 | doi=10.1016/j.infsof.2017.08.011|hdl=10344/6233 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

{{TOC limit}}

==History==
[[Iterative and incremental development|Iterative and incremental software development methods]] can be traced back as early as 1957,<ref name="craig2003">[[Gerald M. Weinberg]], as quoted in {{harvnb|Larman|Basili|2003|pp=47–56}} "We were doing incremental development as early as 1957 in Los Angeles, under the direction of Bernie Dimsdale at [[Service Bureau Corporation|IBM's Service Bureau Corporation]]. He was a colleague of [[John von Neumann]], so perhaps he learned it there, or assumed it as totally natural. I do remember Herb Jacobs (primarily, though we all participated) developing a large simulation for Motorola, where the technique used was, as far as I can tell&nbsp;... All of us, as far as I can remember, thought waterfalling of a huge project was rather stupid, or at least ignorant of the realities. I think what the waterfall description did for us was make us realize that we were doing something else, something unnamed except for 'software development.'"</ref> with evolutionary project management<ref name="EvolutionaryProjectManagement">{{cite web
 |url=https://www.gilb.com/Project-Management 
 |access-date=2017-04-30 
 |url-status=dead 
 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160327214807/http://www.gilb.com/Project-Management 
 |title=Evolutionary Project Management (Original page, external archive) 
 |archive-date=27 March 2016 
 |publisher=Gilb 
}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
|url=http://concepts.gilb.com/tiki-page.php?pageName=Evolutionary-Project-Management 
|title=Evolutionary Project Management (New page)
|access-date=2017-04-30
|publisher=Gilb}}</ref> and [[adaptive software development]]<ref name="edmonds1974">{{Cite journal
|last=Edmonds
|first=E. A.
|year=1974
|title=A Process for the Development of Software for Nontechnical Users as an Adaptive System
|journal=General Systems
|volume=19
|pages=215–18}}</ref> emerging in the early 1970s.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gilb|first=Tom|s2cid=33902347|date=1981-04-01|title=Evolutionary development|journal=ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes|language=en|volume=6|issue=2|pages=17|doi=10.1145/1010865.1010868}}</ref>

During the 1990s, a number of ''lightweight'' software development methods evolved in reaction to the prevailing ''heavyweight'' methods (often referred to collectively as [[Waterfall model|''waterfall'']]) that critics described as overly regulated, planned, and [[Micromanagement|micromanaged]].<ref>{{Citation |title=Heavyweight project organizationHEAVYWEIGHT PROJECT ORGANIZATION |date=2000 |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-0612-8_400 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Production and Manufacturing Management |pages=261–262 |editor-last=Swamidass |editor-first=P. M. |place=Boston, MA |publisher=Springer US |language=en |doi=10.1007/1-4020-0612-8_400 |isbn=978-1-4020-0612-8 |access-date=2022-06-22|url-access=subscription }}</ref> These lightweight methods included: [[rapid application development]] (RAD), from 1991;<ref>{{cite book | title=Rapid Application Development | publisher=Macmillan | author=Martin, James | year=1991 | isbn=978-0-02-376775-3 | url=https://archive.org/details/rapidapplication00mart }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | title=Inside RAD: How to Build a Fully Functional System in 90 Days or Less | publisher=McGraw-Hill |author1=Kerr, James M. |author2=Hunter, Richard | year=1993 | page=3 | isbn=978-0-07-034223-1}}</ref> the [[Unified Process|unified process]] (UP) and [[dynamic systems development method]] (DSDM), both from 1994; [[Scrum (software development)|Scrum]], from 1995; Crystal Clear and [[extreme programming]] (XP), both from 1996; and [[feature-driven development]] (FDD), from 1997. Although these all originated before the publication of the ''Agile Manifesto'', they are now collectively referred to as agile software development methods.<ref name="LarmanGuide">{{Cite book 
|last=Larman 
|first=Craig 
|year=2004 
|title=Agile and Iterative Development: A Manager's Guide 
|publisher=Addison-Wesley 
|isbn=978-0-13-111155-4 
|page=27 
}}</ref>

Already since 1991 similar changes had been underway in [[Agile manufacturing|manufacturing]]<ref>Iacocca Institute (1991). "21st Century Manufacturing Enterprise Strategy: An Industry Led View". Iacocca Institute, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.</ref><ref>Presley, A., J. Mills and D. Liles (1995). "Agile Aerospace Manufacturing". Nepcon East 1995, Boston.</ref> and [[Agile management|management thinking]]<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Sanchez |first=Luis |date=November 2010 |title=A Review of Agile Manufacturing Systems |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261652716 |journal=International Journal of Production Research |issue=39(16):3561-3600}}</ref> derived from [[Lean manufacturing|Lean management]].

In 2001, seventeen software developers met at a resort in [[Snowbird, Utah|Snowbird]], [[Utah]] to discuss lightweight development methods. They were: [[Kent Beck]] (Extreme Programming), [[Ward Cunningham]] (Extreme Programming), [[Dave Thomas (programmer)|Dave Thomas]] ([[The Pragmatic Programmer|Pragmatic Programming]], Ruby), [[Jeff Sutherland]] (Scrum), [[Ken Schwaber]] (Scrum), [[Jim Highsmith]] (Adaptive Software Development), [[Alistair Cockburn]] (Crystal), [[Robert C. Martin]] ([[SOLID]]), [[Mike Beedle]] (Scrum), Arie van Bennekum, [[Martin Fowler (software engineer)|Martin Fowler]] ([[OOAD]] and [[UML]]), James Grenning, [[Andy Hunt (author)|Andrew Hunt]] (Pragmatic Programming, Ruby), [[Ron Jeffries]] (Extreme Programming), [[Jon Kern]], Brian Marick (Ruby, [[Test-driven development]]), and [[Stephen J. Mellor|Steve Mellor]] ([[Shlaer–Mellor method|OOA]]). The group, The Agile Alliance, published the ''Manifesto for Agile Software Development''.<ref name="AgileManifesto" />

In 2005, a group headed by Cockburn and Highsmith wrote an addendum of [[project management]] principles, the PM Declaration of Interdependence,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pmdoi.org|title=Declaration of Interdependence|last=Anderson|first=David|year=2005|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180127094805/http://www.pmdoi.org/|archive-date=27 January 2018|url-status=dead|access-date=4 October 2018}}</ref> to guide software project management according to agile software development methods.

In 2009, a group working with Martin wrote an extension of [[software development]] principles, the [[Software craftsmanship|Software Craftsmanship Manifesto]], to guide agile software development according to [[professional]] conduct and mastery.

In 2011, the Agile Alliance created the ''Guide to Agile Practices'' (renamed the ''Agile Glossary'' in 2016),<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.agilealliance.org/how-you-can-help-the-agile-alliance-help-you/|title=How You Can Help Agile Alliance Help You|last=McDonald|first=Kent|date=1 November 2016|work=Agile Alliance Blog|access-date=4 July 2017}}</ref> an evolving [[Open source|open-source]] compendium of the working definitions of agile practices, terms, and elements, along with interpretations and experience guidelines from the worldwide community of agile practitioners.

== Values and principles <span class="anchor" id="The Agile Manifesto"></span> ==

=== Values ===
The agile manifesto reads:<ref name="AgileManifesto" />

''We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value:''

* {{em | {{strong | Individuals and interactions}} over processes and tools }}
* {{em | {{strong | Working software}} over comprehensive documentation }}
* {{em | {{strong | Customer collaboration}} over contract negotiation }}
* {{em | {{strong | Responding to change}} over following a plan }}

''That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more.''

[[Scott Ambler]] explained:<ref name="abmmw">
{{cite web |url=http://www.ambysoft.com/essays/agileManifesto.html |title=Examining the Agile Manifesto |publisher=Ambysoft Inc.
|access-date=6 April 2011}}</ref>
* Tools and processes are important, but it is more important to have competent people working together effectively.
*Good documentation is useful in helping people to understand how the software is built and how to use it, but the main point of development is to create software, not documentation.
*A contract is important but is not a substitute for working closely with customers to discover what they need.
*A project plan is important, but it must not be too rigid to accommodate changes in technology or the environment, stakeholders' priorities, and people's understanding of the problem and its solution.

Introducing the manifesto on behalf of the Agile Alliance, [[Jim Highsmith]] said,
{{Blockquote
|text=The Agile movement is not anti-methodology, in fact many of us want to restore credibility to the word methodology. We want to restore a balance. We embrace modeling, but not in order to file some diagram in a dusty corporate repository. We embrace documentation, but not hundreds of pages of never-maintained and rarely-used tomes. We plan, but recognize the limits of planning in a turbulent environment. Those who would brand proponents of XP or SCRUM or any of the other Agile Methodologies as "hackers" are ignorant of both the methodologies and the original definition of the term hacker.|sign=Jim Highsmith
|author=Jim Highsmith
|source=History: The Agile Manifesto<ref>
{{cite web 
      | url=http://agilemanifesto.org/history.html 
      | title=History: The Agile Manifesto 
      |year=2001 
      |author=Jim Highsmith
      |author-link=Jim Highsmith
      |publisher=agilemanifesto.org}}
</ref>}}

=== {{anchor|Agile principles}} Principles ===

The values are based on these principles:<ref name="ManifestoPrinciples">
{{cite web
|url=http://www.agilemanifesto.org/principles.html 
|title=Principles behind the Agile Manifesto 
|year=2001 
|publisher=Agile Alliance 
|author=Kent Beck |author2=James Grenning |author3-link=Robert Cecil Martin 
|author3=Robert C. Martin |author4=Mike Beedle |author5-link=Jim Highsmith 
|author5=Jim Highsmith |author6-link=Stephen J. Mellor 
|author6=Steve Mellor |author7=Arie van Bennekum |author8-link=Andy Hunt (author) 
|author8=Andrew Hunt |author9-link=Ken Schwaber 
|author9=Ken Schwaber |author10-link=Alistair Cockburn 
|author10=Alistair Cockburn |author11-link=Ron Jeffries 
|author11=Ron Jeffries |author12-link=Jeff Sutherland 
|author12=Jeff Sutherland |author13-link=Ward Cunningham 
|author13=Ward Cunningham |author14=Jon Kern |author15-link=Dave Thomas (programmer) 
|author15=Dave Thomas |author16-link=Martin Fowler (software engineer) 
|author16=Martin Fowler
|author17=Brian Marick 
|access-date=6 June 2010 
|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100614043008/http://www.agilemanifesto.org/principles.html 
|archive-date=14 June 2010 
|url-status=live
|author-link=Kent Beck 
}}</ref>
# Customer satisfaction by early and continuous delivery of valuable software.
# Welcome changing requirements, even in late development.
# Deliver working software frequently (weeks rather than months).
# Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers.
# Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted.
# Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (co-location).
# Working software is the primary measure of progress.
# Sustainable development, able to maintain a constant pace.
# Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design.
# Simplicity—the art of maximizing the amount of work {{Not a typo|not}} done—is essential.
# Best [[Agile Architecture|architectures]], requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.
# Regularly, the team reflects on how to become more effective, and adjusts accordingly.

==Overview==
===Iterative, incremental, and evolutionary===
Most agile development methods break product development work into small increments that minimize the amount of up-front planning and design. Iterations, or sprints, are short time frames ([[timeboxing|timeboxes]]){{sfn|Project Management Institute|2021|loc=2.3.3 Development Approaches}} that typically last from one to four weeks.{{sfn|Rubin|2013}}{{rp|20}} Each iteration involves a [[cross-functional team]] working in all functions: [[Project planning|planning]], [[requirements analysis|analysis]], [[Software design|design]], [[Computer programming|coding]], [[unit testing]], and [[acceptance testing]]. At the end of the iteration a working product is demonstrated to stakeholders. This minimizes overall risk and allows the product to adapt to changes quickly.{{sfn|Project Management Institute|2021|loc=§3.12 Enable Change to Achieve the Envisioned Future State}}<ref name="auto">{{cite book | author=Moran, A.|title=Agile Risk Management |publisher=Springer Verlag|year=2014|isbn=978-3319050072}}</ref> An iteration might not add enough functionality to warrant a market release, but the goal is to have an available release (with minimal [[Software bug|bugs]]) at the end of each iteration.<ref name="embracing change">{{cite journal|
last=Beck|first=Kent|
year=1999|title=Embracing Change with Extreme Programming|
journal=Computer|volume=32|issue=10|
pages=70–77|
doi=10.1109/2.796139}}</ref> Through incremental development, products have room to "[[Fail-fast system|fail often and early]]" throughout each iterative phase instead of drastically on a final release date.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mergel|first=Ines|date=July 2016|title=Agile innovation management in government: A research agenda|url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0740624X16301101|journal=Government Information Quarterly|language=en|volume=33|issue=3|pages=516–523|doi=10.1016/j.giq.2016.07.004}}</ref> Multiple iterations might be required to release a product or new features. Working software is the primary measure of progress.<ref name="ManifestoPrinciples" />

A key advantage of agile approaches is speed to market and risk mitigation. Smaller increments are typically released to market, reducing the time and cost risks of engineering a product that doesn't meet user requirements.

===Efficient and face-to-face communication===
The 6th principle of the agile manifesto for software development states "The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation". The manifesto, written in 2001 when video conferencing was not widely used, states this in relation to the communication of information, not necessarily that a team should be co-located.

The principle of [[Colocation (business)|co-location]] is that co-workers on the same team should be situated together to better establish the identity as a team and to improve communication.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.infoq.com/news/collaborative-team-space-study |title=Study: Co-Located Teams vs. the Cubicle Farm |last=Preuss |first=Deborah Hartmann |date=13 October 2006 |website=InfoQ |access-date=2018-10-23}}</ref> This enables [[face-to-face interaction]], ideally in front of a whiteboard, that reduces the cycle time typically taken when questions and answers are mediated through phone, [[Persistent Chat|persistent chat]], wiki, or email.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.pearson.com/us/higher-education/program/Cockburn-Agile-Software-Development-The-Cooperative-Game-2nd-Edition/PGM38838.html |title=Agile Software Development: The Cooperative Game |last=Cockburn |first=Alistair |date=2007 |website=www.pearson.com |publisher=Addison-Wesley Professional |language=en |access-date=2018-10-23 |edition=2nd}}</ref> With the widespread adoption of remote working during the COVID-19 pandemic and changes to tooling, more studies have been conducted<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.managers.org.uk/knowledge-and-insights/research-thought-leadership/management-transformed/ | title=Management Transformed &#124; Research }}</ref> around co-location and distributed working which show that co-location is increasingly less relevant.

No matter which development method is followed, every team should include a [[customer representative]] (known as ''product owner'' in [[Scrum (software development)|Scrum]]). This representative is agreed by stakeholders to act on their behalf and makes a personal commitment to being available for developers to answer questions throughout the iteration. At the end of each iteration, the [[project stakeholder]]s together with the customer representative review progress and re-evaluate priorities with a view to optimizing the [[Rate of return|return on investment]] (ROI) and ensuring alignment with customer needs and company goals. The importance of stakeholder satisfaction, detailed by frequent interaction and review at the end of each phase, is why the approach is often denoted as a [[Customer centricity|customer-centered methodology]].<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Jain |first1=Parita |last2=Sharma |first2=Arun 
|last3=Ahuja |first3=Laxmi |title=2018 7th International Conference on Reliability, Infocom Technologies and Optimization (Trends and Future Directions) (ICRITO) |chapter=The Impact of Agile Software Development Process on the Quality of Software Product |date=August 2018 |chapter-url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8748529 |location=Noida, India |publisher=IEEE |pages=812–815 |doi=10.1109/ICRITO.2018.8748529 |isbn=978-1-5386-4692-2 |s2cid=195775457}}</ref>

==== Information radiator ====
In agile software development, an '''information radiator''' is a (normally large) physical display, board with [[sticky note]]s or similar, located prominently near the development team, where passers-by can see it.{{sfn|Project Management Institute|2021|loc=§2.7.3.2 Information Radiators}} It presents an up-to-date summary of the product development status.<ref name=Ambler>{{cite book |title=Agile Modeling: Effective Practices for EXtreme Programming and the Unified Process |first=Scott |last=Ambler |date=12 April 2002 |isbn=978-0-471-20282-0 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |pages=12, 164, 363}}</ref> A [[build light indicator]] may also be used to inform a team about the current status of their product development.

===Very short feedback loop and adaptation cycle===
A common characteristic in agile software development is the [[Stand-up meeting|daily stand-up]] (known as ''daily scrum'' in the Scrum framework). In a brief session (e.g., 15 minutes), team members review collectively how they are progressing toward their goal and agree whether they need to adapt their approach. To keep to the agreed time limit, teams often use simple coded questions (such as what they completed the previous day, what they aim to complete that day, and whether there are any impediments or risks to progress), and delay detailed discussions and problem resolution until after the stand-up.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.eylean.com/Publications/DownloadPublication/3443705e-1697-4557-8327-ff8644fab40b?name=Whitepaper---Developing-agile-project-task-and-team-management-practices |title=Developing agile project task and team management practices |publisher=Eylean |first=Vidas |last=Vasiliauskas |date=2014 |access-date=15 September 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140915141234/http://www.eylean.com/Publications/DownloadPublication/3443705e-1697-4557-8327-ff8644fab40b?name=Whitepaper---Developing-agile-project-task-and-team-management-practices |archive-date=15 September 2014 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

===Quality focus===
[[File:Pair programming 1.jpg|thumb|right|[[Pair programming]], an agile development technique used in [[Extreme Programming|XP]]]]
Specific tools and techniques, such as [[continuous integration]], automated [[unit testing]], [[pair programming]], [[test-driven development]], [[Software design pattern|design patterns]], [[behavior-driven development]], [[domain-driven design]], [[code refactoring]] and other techniques are often used to improve quality and enhance product development agility.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Jeffries|first1=Ron|last2=Anderson|first2=Ann|last3=Hendrickson|first3=Chet|title=Extreme Programming installed|date=2001|publisher=Addison-Weslsy|isbn=978-0201-70842-4|pages=[https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi00jeff/page/72 72–147]|url=https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi00jeff/page/72}}</ref> This is predicated on designing and building quality in from the beginning and being able to demonstrate software for customers at any point, or at least at the end of every iteration.<ref>{{cite book|title=Agile Testing: A Practical Guide for Testers and Agile Teams|author=Lisa Crispin|author2=Janet Gregory|publisher=Addison-Wesley|year=2009}}</ref>

==Philosophy==
Compared to traditional software engineering, agile software development mainly targets complex systems and product development with dynamic, [[indeterministic]] and non-linear [[Property_(philosophy) | properties]]. Accurate estimates, stable plans, and predictions are often hard to get in early stages, and confidence in them is likely to be low. Agile practitioners use their [[free will]] to reduce the "[[leap of faith]]" that is needed before any [[evidence]] of [[Value_(ethics_and_social_sciences)|value]] can be obtained.<ref name=Mitchell2016>{{Cite book | last=Mitchell | first=Ian | year=2016 | title=Agile Development in Practice | publisher= Tamare House | isbn=978-1-908552-49-5| page=11 }}</ref> Requirements and design are held to be [[Emergentism|emergent]]. Big up-front specifications would probably [[cause]] a lot of waste in such cases, i.e., are not economically sound. These basic [[arguments]] and previous industry [[experiences]], learned from years of successes and failures, have helped shape agile development's favor of adaptive, iterative and evolutionary development.<ref name=Larman2004>{{Cite book | last=Larman | first=Craig | year=2004 | title=Agile and Iterative Development: A Manager's Guide | publisher=Addison-Wesley | isbn=978-0-13-111155-4 | page=27 }}</ref>

=== Adaptive vs. predictive ===
Development methods exist on a continuum from ''adaptive'' to ''predictive''.<ref name="boehm2004App">{{cite book|last=Boehm|first=B.|author-link=Barry Boehm|author2=R. Turner|title=Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed|publisher=Addison-Wesley|location=Boston, MA|year=2004|isbn=978-0-321-18612-6|author2-link=Richard Turner (software)}} Appendix A, pages&nbsp;165–194</ref> Agile software development methods lie on the ''adaptive'' side of this continuum. One key of adaptive development methods is a [[Rolling Wave planning|''rolling wave'']] approach to schedule planning, which identifies milestones but leaves flexibility in the path to reach them, and also allows for the milestones themselves to change.<ref>{{cite book | title=Agile and Iterative Development: A Manager's Guide | last=Larman | first=Craig | year=2004 |page=253 | chapter=Chapter 11: Practice Tips | publisher=Addison-Wesley Professional |  isbn=9780131111554 | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=76rnV5Exs50C&q=adaptive%20predictive%20%22rolling%20wave%22&pg=PA253 | access-date=14 October 2013}}</ref>

''Adaptive'' methods focus on adapting quickly to changing realities. When the needs of a project change, an adaptive team changes as well. An adaptive team has difficulty describing exactly what will happen in the future. The further away a date is, the more vague an adaptive method is about what will happen on that date. An adaptive team cannot report exactly what tasks they will do next week, but only which features they plan for next month. When asked about a release six months from now, an adaptive team might be able to report only the mission statement for the release, or a statement of expected value vs. cost.

''Predictive'' methods, in contrast, focus on analyzing and planning the future in detail and cater for known risks. In the extremes, a predictive team can report exactly what features and tasks are planned for the entire length of the development process. Predictive methods rely on effective early phase analysis, and if this goes very wrong, the project may have difficulty changing direction. Predictive teams often institute a [[change control board]] to ensure they consider only the most valuable changes.

[[Risk analysis (engineering)|Risk analysis]] can be used to choose between adaptive (''agile'' or ''value-driven'') and predictive (''plan-driven'') methods.<ref name="PMBridgeToAgility">{{Cite book |last1=Sliger |first1=Michele |last2=Broderick |first2=Stacia |title=The Software Project Manager's Bridge to Agility |publisher=Addison-Wesley |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-321-50275-9 |page=46 }}</ref> [[Barry Boehm]] and [[Richard Turner (computer scientist)|Richard Turner]] suggest that each side of the continuum has its own ''home ground'', as follows:<ref name="boehm2004"/>

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Home grounds of different development methods
|-
! style="width: 33%" | Value-driven methods (agile)
! style="width: 33%" | Plan-driven methods (waterfall)
! [[Formal methods]]
|-
| Low criticality
| High criticality
| Extreme criticality
|-
| Senior developers
| Junior developers(?)
| Senior developers
|-
| Requirements change often
| Requirements do not change often
| Limited requirements, limited features, see [[Wirth's law]]{{Clarify|date=December 2015}}
|-
| Small number of developers
| Large number of developers
| Requirements that can be modeled
|-
| Culture that responds to change
| Culture that demands order
| Extreme quality
|}

=== Agile vs. waterfall ===
One of the differences between agile software development methods and waterfall is the approach to quality and testing. In the [[waterfall model]], work moves through [[software development life cycle]] (SDLC) phases—with one phase being completed before another can start—hence the '''''testing phase''''' is separate and follows a '''''build phase'''''. In agile software development, however, testing is completed in the same iteration as programming.

Because testing is done in every iteration—which develops a small piece of the software—users can frequently use those new pieces of software and validate the value. After the users know the real value of the updated piece of software, they can make better decisions about the software's future. Having a value retrospective and software re-planning session in each iteration—[[Scrum (software development)|Scrum]] typically has iterations of just two weeks—helps the team continuously adapt its plans so as to maximize the value it delivers. This follows a pattern similar to the [[PDCA|plan-do-check-act]] (PDCA) cycle, as the work is ''planned'', ''done'', ''checked'' (in the review and retrospective), and any changes agreed are ''acted'' upon.

This iterative approach supports a ''product'' rather than a ''project'' mindset. This provides greater flexibility throughout the development process; whereas on projects the requirements are defined and locked down from the very beginning, making it difficult to change them later. Iterative product development allows the software to evolve in response to changes in business environment or market requirements.

=== Code vs. documentation ===
In a letter to ''[[Computer (magazine)|IEEE Computer]]'', Steven Rakitin expressed cynicism about agile software development, calling it "''yet another attempt to undermine the discipline of software engineering''" and translating "''working software over comprehensive documentation''" as "''we want to spend all our time coding. Remember, real programmers don't write documentation''."<ref name="rakitin2001">{{Cite journal| last=Rakitin| first=Steven R.| title= Manifesto Elicits Cynicism: Reader's letter to the editor by Steven R. Rakitin|journal=IEEE Computer| volume=34| number=12 | doi = 10.1109/MC.2001.10095 | year=2001| page=4| s2cid=221106984|quote=The article titled 'Agile Software Development: The Business of Innovation' ... is yet another attempt to undermine the discipline of software engineering ... We want to spend all our time coding. Remember, real programmers don't write documentation.}}</ref>

This is disputed by proponents of agile software development, who state that developers should write documentation if that is the best way to achieve the relevant goals, but that there are often better ways to achieve those goals than writing static documentation.<ref name="agiledoc">{{cite web|url=http://www.agilemodeling.com/essays/agileDocumentation.htm|author=Scott Ambler|title=Agile/Lean Documentation: Strategies for Agile Software Development|date=16 April 2023 }}</ref>
[[Scott Ambler]] states that documentation should be "just barely good enough" (JBGE),<ref>{{cite web|author=Scott Ambler|url=http://www.agilemodeling.com/essays/barelyGoodEnough.html|title=Just Barely Good Enough Models and Documents: An Agile Best Practice|access-date=24 January 2014|archive-date=8 October 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141008163437/http://www.agilemodeling.com/essays/barelyGoodEnough.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> that too much or comprehensive documentation would usually cause waste, and developers rarely trust detailed documentation because it's usually out of sync with code,<ref name="agiledoc"/> while too little documentation may also cause problems for maintenance, communication, learning and knowledge sharing. [[Alistair Cockburn]] wrote of the ''Crystal Clear'' method: 
{{Blockquote|text=Crystal considers development a series of co-operative games, and intends that the documentation is enough to help the next win at the next game. The work products for Crystal include use cases, risk list, iteration plan, core domain models, and design notes to inform on choices...however there are no templates for these documents and descriptions are necessarily vague, but the objective is clear, '''just enough documentation''' for the next game. I always tend to characterize this to my team as: what would you want to know if you joined the team tomorrow.|sign=Alistair Cockburn<ref>{{cite web|author=Geoffrey Wiseman|date=18 July 2007|title=Do Agile Methods Require Documentation?|url=http://www.infoq.com/news/2007/07/agile-methods-documentation|publisher=InfoQ}} quoting {{cite web |last=Cooper |first=Ian |date=6 July 2007 |url=https://ianhammondcooper.wordpress.com/2007/07/06/agile-and-documentation/ |title=Staccato Signals:Agile and Documentation|work=WordPress.com}}</ref>}}

==Methods==
[[File:SoftwareDevelopmentLifeCycle.jpg|thumb|right|Software development life cycle support<ref name="Abrahamsson2002">{{cite tech report|first=Pekka|last=Abrahamson|first2=Outi|last2=Salo|first3=Jussi|last3=Ronkainen|first4=Juhani|last4=Warsta|name-list-style=vanc|title=Agile software development methods: Review and analysis|number=478|institution=[[VTT]]|year=2002|url=http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2002/P478.pdf}}</ref>]]
[[File:Unified_Process_Model_for_Iterative_Development.svg|thumb|right|[[Agile unified process]] (AUP) is based on [[unified process]] (an iterative and incremental software development process framework).]] 
Agile software development methods support a broad range of the [[software development life cycle]].<ref name="Abrahamsson2002" /> Some methods focus on the practices (e.g., [[Extreme programming|XP]], [[The Pragmatic Programmer|pragmatic programming]], agile modeling), while some focus on managing the flow of work (e.g., Scrum, Kanban). Some support activities for requirements specification and development (e.g., [[Feature-driven development|FDD]]), while some seek to cover the full development life cycle (e.g., [[Dynamic systems development method|DSDM]], [[Rational Unified Process|RUP]]).

Notable agile software development frameworks include:
{| class="wikitable"
! Framework
! Main contributor(s)
|-
| [[Adaptive software development]] (ASD) || [[Jim Highsmith]], Sam Bayer
|-
| [[Agile modeling]] || [[Scott Ambler]], [[Robert Cecil Martin]]
|-
| [[Agile Unified Process|Agile unified process]] (AUP) || [[Scott Ambler]]
|-
| [[Disciplined agile delivery]] || [[Scott Ambler]]
|-
| [[Dynamic systems development method]] (DSDM) ||Jennifer Stapleton
|-
| [[Extreme programming]] (XP) || [[Kent Beck]], [[Robert Cecil Martin]]
|-
| [[Feature-driven development]] (FDD) || [[Jeff De Luca]]
|-
| [[Lean software development]] || Mary Poppendieck, Tom Poppendieck
|-
| [[Lean startup]] || [[Eric Ries]]
|-
| [[Kanban (development)|Kanban]] || [[Taiichi Ohno]]
|-
| [[Rapid application development]] (RAD) || [[James Martin (author)|James Martin]]
|-
| [[Scrum (software development)|Scrum]] || [[Ken Schwaber]], [[Jeff Sutherland]]
|-
| [[Scrumban]] ||
|}

=== Agile software development practices ===
Agile software development is supported by a number of concrete practices, covering areas like requirements, design, modeling, coding, testing, planning, risk management, process, quality, etc. Some notable agile software development practices include:<ref name="Agile Practices Guide">{{cite web|url=http://guide.agilealliance.org/ |title=Guide to Agile Practices |publisher=the Agile Alliance |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140209152034/http://guide.agilealliance.org/ |archive-date=9 February 2014}}</ref>
{| class="wikitable"
! Practice
! Main contributor(s)
|-
|[[Acceptance test-driven development]] (ATDD) || Ken Pugh
|-
| [[Agile modeling]] || [[Scott Ambler]]
|-
| [[Agile testing]] || Lisa Crispin, Janet Gregory 
|- 
|[[Scrum (development)#Product backlog|Backlogs]] (Product and Sprint)|| [[Ken Schwaber]], [[Jeff Sutherland]]
|- 
|[[Behavior-driven development]] (BDD) || Dan North, Liz Keogh
|- 
|[[Continuous integration]] (CI) || [[Grady Booch]]
|- 
|[[Cross-functional team]] ||
|-
|[[Stand-up meeting|Daily stand-up / Daily Scrum]]
|[[Jim Coplien|James O Coplien]]
|- 
|[[Domain-driven design]] (DDD) || Eric Evans
|-
| [[Iterative and incremental development]] (IID) ||
|-
|[[Pair programming]] || [[Kent Beck]]
|-
|[[Planning poker]] || James Grenning, [[Mike Cohn]]
|-
|[[Refactoring]] || [[Martin Fowler (software engineer)|Martin Fowler]]
|-
|[[Retrospective]] || Esther Derby, Diana Larsen, Ben Linders, Luis Gonçalves
|-
|[[Scrum (development)|Scrum events]] (sprint planning, sprint review and retrospective) || [[Ken Schwaber]], [[Jeff Sutherland]]
|-
| [[Specification by example]] ||
|-
|[[Story-driven modeling]] || Albert Zündorf
|-
| [[Test-driven development]] (TDD) || [[Kent Beck]]
|-
|[[Timeboxing]] ||
|-
| [[User story]] || [[Alistair Cockburn]] 
|-
| [[Velocity (software development)|Velocity tracking]] ||
|}

====Acceptance test-driven development====
{{Excerpt|Acceptance test-driven development|only=paragraph}}

====Agile modeling====
{{Excerpt|Agile modeling|only=paragraph}}

====Agile testing====
{{Excerpt|Agile testing|only=paragraph}}

====Backlogs====
{{Excerpt|Product backlog|only=paragraph}}

====Behavior-driven development====
{{Excerpt|Behavior-driven development|only=paragraph}}

====Continuous integration====
{{Excerpt|Continuous integration|only=paragraph}}

====Cross-functional team====
{{Excerpt|Cross-functional team|only=paragraph}}

====Daily stand-up====
{{Excerpt|Stand-up meeting|only=paragraph}}

===Method tailoring===
In the literature, different terms refer to the notion of method adaptation, including 'method tailoring', 'method fragment adaptation' and 'situational method engineering'. Method tailoring is defined as:

{{Blockquote
|text=A process or capability in which human agents determine a system development approach for a specific project situation through responsive changes in, and dynamic interplays between contexts, intentions, and method fragments.
|author=Mehmet Nafiz Aydin et al.
|source=An Agile Information Systems Development Method in use<ref name="Aydin2004">{{cite journal | last1 = Aydin | first1 = M.N. | last2 = Harmsen | first2 = F. | last3 = Slooten | last4 = Stagwee | first4 = R. A. | year = 2004 | title = An Agile Information Systems Development Method in use | journal = Turk J Elec Engin | volume = 12 | issue = 2| pages = 127–138 }}</ref>}}

Situation-appropriateness should be considered as a distinguishing characteristic between agile methods and more plan-driven software development methods, with agile methods allowing product development teams to adapt working practices according to the needs of individual products.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Paradox of Agile Transformation: Why trying too hard to be Agile stops organisations from becoming truly agile|last=Morris|first=David|publisher=University of Auckland|year=2015|location=NZ|doi=10.13140/RG.2.2.32698.08640}}</ref><ref name="Aydin2004" /> Potentially, most agile methods could be suitable for method tailoring,<ref name="Abrahamsson2002" /> such as [[Dynamic Systems Development Method|DSDM]] tailored in a [[Capability Maturity Model|CMM]] context.<ref name="Abrahamsson2003">Abrahamsson, P., Warsta, J., Siponen, M.T., & Ronkainen, J. (2003). New Directions on Agile Methods: A Comparative Analysis. ''Proceedings of ICSE'03'', 244-254</ref> and XP tailored with the ''Rule Description Practices'' (RDP) technique.<ref>{{cite book|title=Proceedings of the 2008 international workshop on Scrutinizing agile practices or shoot-out at the agile corral (APOS '08)|last1=Mirakhorli|first1=M.|last2=Rad|first2=A.K.|last3=Shams|first3=F.|last4=Pazoki|first4=M.|last5=Mirakhorli|first5=A.|s2cid=9528636|publisher=ACM|year=2008|isbn=978-1-60558-021-0|pages=23–32|chapter=RDP technique: a practice to customize xp|doi=10.1145/1370143.1370149}}</ref> Not all agile proponents agree, however, with Schwaber noting "that is how we got into trouble in the first place, thinking that the problem was not having a perfect methodology. Efforts [should] center on the changes [needed] in the enterprise".<ref>Schwaber, K (2006) Scrum is hard and disruptive.</ref> Bas Vodde reinforced this viewpoint, suggesting that unlike traditional, large methodologies that require you to pick and choose elements, Scrum provides the basics on top of which you add additional elements to localize and contextualize its use.<ref>Vodde, B (2016) The Story of LeSS. Closing Keynote. Scrum Australia, Melbourne. April, 2016.</ref> Practitioners seldom use [[Software development process|system development methods]], or agile methods specifically, by the book, often choosing to omit or tailor some of the practices of a method in order to create an in-house method.<ref>Lagstedt, A., and Dahlberg, T. (2018). Understanding the Rarity of ISD Method Selection – Bounded Rationality and Functional Stupidity. PACIS 2018 Proceedings. 154. https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2018/154.</ref>

In practice, methods can be tailored using various tools. Generic process modeling languages such as [[Unified Modeling Language]] can be used to tailor software development methods. However, dedicated tools for method engineering such as the Essence Theory of Software Engineering of [[SEMAT]] also exist.<ref>Park, J. S., McMahon, P. E., and Myburgh, B. (2016). Scrum Powered by Essence. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 41(1), pp. 1–8.</ref>

=== Large-scale, offshore and distributed ===
Agile software development has been widely seen as highly suited to certain types of environments, including small teams of experts working on [[greenfield project]]s,<ref name="boehm2004">{{cite book|last=Boehm|first=B.|author-link=Barry Boehm|author2=R. Turner|title=Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed|publisher=Addison-Wesley|location=Boston, MA|year=2004|isbn=978-0-321-18612-6|pages=55–57|author2-link=Richard Turner (software)}}</ref><ref name="beck1999">{{cite book|last=Beck|first=K.|author-link=Kent Beck|title=Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change|publisher=Addison-Wesley|location=Boston, MA|year=1999|isbn=978-0-321-27865-4}}</ref> and the challenges and limitations encountered in the adoption of agile software development methods in a large organization with [[Legacy system|legacy infrastructure]] are well-documented and understood.<ref>{{cite web|last=Evans|first=Ian |title=Agile Delivery at British Telecom|url=http://www.methodsandtools.com/archive/archive.php?id=43| access-date =21 February 2011}}</ref>

In response, a range of strategies and patterns has evolved for overcoming challenges with large-scale development efforts (>20 developers)<ref name="ambler2006"/><ref name="sstc2007">Schaaf, R.J. (2007). Agility XL [http://www.sstc-online.org/Proceedings/2007/pdfs/RJS1722.pdf Systems and Software Technology Conference 2007] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160313105019/http://sstc-online.org/proceedings/2007/pdfs/rjs1722.pdf |date=13 March 2016 }}, Tampa, FL</ref> or distributed (non-colocated) development teams,<ref name="BridgingTheDistance">{{cite web|url=http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/184414899 |title=Bridging the Distance |publisher=Sdmagazine.com |access-date=1 February 2011}}</ref><ref name="AgileOffshore">{{cite web|first=Martin |last=Fowler |url=http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/agileOffshore.html |title=Using an Agile Software Process with Offshore Development |publisher=Martinfowler.com |access-date=6 June 2010}}</ref> amongst other challenges; and there are now several recognized frameworks that seek to mitigate or avoid these challenges.

There are many conflicting viewpoints on whether all of these are effective or indeed fit the definition of agile development, and this remains an active and ongoing area of research.<ref name="ambler2006">W. Scott Ambler (2006) [http://www.drdobbs.com/184415491 Supersize Me] in Dr. Dobb's Journal, 15 February 2006.</ref><ref name="oopsla2002">Agile Processes Workshop II Managing Multiple Concurrent Agile Projects. Washington: OOPSLA 2002</ref>

When agile software development is applied in a distributed setting (with teams dispersed across multiple business locations), it is commonly referred to as [[distributed agile software development]]. The goal is to leverage the unique benefits offered by each approach. Distributed development allows organizations to build software by strategically setting up teams in different parts of the globe, virtually building software round-the-clock (more commonly referred to as follow-the-sun model). On the other hand, agile development provides increased transparency, continuous feedback, and more flexibility when responding to changes.

=== Regulated domains ===
Agile software development methods were initially seen as best suitable for non-critical product developments, thereby excluded from use in regulated domains such as [[medical device]]s, pharmaceutical, financial, nuclear systems, automotive, and avionics sectors, etc. However, in the last several years, there have been several initiatives for the adaptation of agile methods for these domains.<ref name="Cawley2010">{{Cite book|date = 2010|isbn = 978-3-642-16415-6|pages = 31–36|series = Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing|volume = 65|first1 = Oisín|last1 = Cawley|first2 = Xiaofeng|last2 = Wang|first3 = Ita|last3 = Richardson| title=Lean Enterprise Software and Systems | chapter=Lean/Agile Software Development Methodologies in Regulated Environments – State of the Art |editor-first = Pekka|editor-last = Abrahamsson|editor2-first = Nilay|editor2-last = Oza|doi=10.1007/978-3-642-16416-3_4|hdl = 10344/683}}</ref><ref name="McHugh2014">{{Cite book|date = 2014-11-04|isbn = 978-3-319-13035-4|pages = 190–201|series = Communications in Computer and Information Science|volume = 477|first1 = Martin|last1 = McHugh|first2 = Fergal|last2 = McCaffery|first3 = Garret|last3 = Coady| title=Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination | chapter=An Agile Implementation within a Medical Device Software Organisation |editor-first = Antanas|editor-last = Mitasiunas|editor2-first = Terry|editor2-last = Rout|editor3-first = Rory V.|editor3-last = O'Connor|editor4-first = Alec|editor4-last = Dorling| display-editors = 3|doi=10.1007/978-3-319-13036-1_17|url = https://arrow.dit.ie/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1152&context=scschcomcon}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last1=Wang|first1=Yang|last2=Ramadani|first2=Jasmin|last3=Wagner|first3=Stefan|title=Product-Focused Software Process Improvement |chapter=An Exploratory Study on Applying a Scrum Development Process for Safety-Critical Systems |date=2017-11-29|series=Lecture Notes in Computer Science|language=en|volume=10611|pages=324–340|arxiv=1703.05375|doi=10.1007/978-3-319-69926-4_23|isbn=9783319699257|bibcode=2017arXiv170305375W|s2cid=4585465}}</ref><ref name="SafeScrum">{{cite web|url=http://www.sintef.no/safescrum |title=SafeScrum - SINTEF |publisher=Sintef.no |access-date=2019-03-26}}</ref><ref>Thor Myklebust, Tor Stålhane, Geir Kjetil Hanssen, Tormod Wien and Børge Haugset: Scrum, documentation and the IEC 61508-3:2010 software standard, http://www.sintef.no/globalassets/ec-61508-documentation-and-safescrum-psam12.pdf</ref>

There are numerous standards that may apply in regulated domains, including [[ISO 26262]], [[ISO 9000]], [[ISO 9001]], and [[ISO/IEC 15504]].
A number of key concerns are of particular importance in regulated domains:<ref name="Fitzgerald2013">{{Cite book|date = May 2013|pages = 863–872|doi = 10.1109/ICSE.2013.6606635|first1 = B.|last1 = Fitzgerald|first2 = K.-J.|last2 = Stol|first3 = R.|last3 = O'Sullivan|first4 = D.|last4 = O'Brien| title=2013 35th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) | chapter=Scaling agile methods to regulated environments: An industry case study |isbn = 978-1-4673-3076-3|hdl = 10344/3055|s2cid = 192403}}</ref>

* [[Quality assurance]] (QA): Systematic and inherent quality management underpinning a controlled professional process and reliability and correctness of product.
* Safety and security: Formal planning and risk management to mitigate safety risks for users and securely protecting users from unintentional and malicious misuse.
*[[Traceability]]: Documentation providing auditable evidence of regulatory compliance and facilitating traceability and investigation of problems.
* [[Verification and validation]] (V&V): Embedded throughout the software development process (e.g. user requirements specification, functional specification, design specification, code review, unit tests, integration tests, system tests).

==Experience and adoption==
Although agile software development methods can be used with any programming paradigm or language in practice, they were originally closely associated with object-oriented environments such as Smalltalk, Lisp and later Java, C#. The initial adopters of agile methods were usually small to medium-sized teams working on unprecedented systems with requirements that were difficult to finalize and likely to change as the system was being developed. This section describes common problems that organizations encounter when they try to adopt agile software development methods as well as various techniques to measure the quality and performance of agile teams.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Beck|first1=Kent|title=Extreme Programming Explained|date=2000|publisher=Addison-Wesley|isbn=978-0201616415|pages=[https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi00beck/page/1 1–24]|url=https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi00beck/page/1}}</ref>

===Measuring agility===

==== Internal assessments ====
The ''Agility measurement index'', amongst others, rates developments against five dimensions of product development (duration, risk, novelty, effort, and interaction).<ref>{{cite conference |doi=10.1145/1185448.1185509|book-title=ACM-SE 44 Proceedings of the 44th annual Southeast regional conference |page=271 |year=2006 |last=Datta |first=Subhajit |isbn=1595933158 |title=Agility measurement index: a metric for the crossroads of software development methodologies}}</ref> Other techniques are based on measurable goals<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smr.co.uk/presentations/measure.pdf|title=Assessing Agility|author=Peter Lappo|author2=Henry C.T. Andrew|access-date=6 June 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090915040232/http://www.smr.co.uk/presentations/measure.pdf|archive-date=15 September 2009|url-status=dead}}</ref> and one study suggests that [[Velocity (software development)|velocity]] can be used as a metric of agility. There are also agile self-assessments to determine whether a team is using agile software development practices (Nokia test,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://agileconsortium.blogspot.com/2007/12/nokia-test.html|title=Nokia test, A scrum-specific test|author=Joe Little|date=2 December 2007|publisher=Agileconsortium.blogspot.com|access-date=6 June 2010}}</ref> Karlskrona test,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mayberg.se/learning/karlskrona-test|title=Karlskrona test, A generic agile adoption test|author=Mark Seuffert|author2=Mayberg, Sweden|publisher=Mayberg.se|access-date=5 April 2014}}</ref> 42 points test).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-agile-are-you-take-this-42-point-test/|title=How Agile Are You? (Take This 42 Point Test)|publisher=allaboutagile.com/|access-date=3 April 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140505223335/http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-agile-are-you-take-this-42-point-test/|archive-date=5 May 2014|url-status=dead}}</ref>

====Public surveys====
One of the early studies reporting gains in quality, productivity, and business satisfaction by using agile software developments methods was a survey conducted by Shine Technologies from November 2002 to January 2003.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.shinetech.com/attachments/104_ShineTechAgileSurvey2003-01-17.pdf|title=Agile Methodologies Survey Results|date=January 2003|publisher=Shine Technologies|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100821225423/http://www.shinetech.com/attachments/104_ShineTechAgileSurvey2003-01-17.pdf|archive-date=21 August 2010|url-status=dead|access-date=3 June 2010|quote=95% stated that there was either no effect or a cost reduction&nbsp;... 93% stated that productivity was better or significantly better&nbsp;... 88% stated that quality was better or significantly better&nbsp;... 83% stated that business satisfaction was better or significantly better}}</ref>

A similar survey, the ''State of Agile'', is conducted every year starting in 2006 with thousands of participants from around the software development community. This tracks trends on the perceived benefits of agility, lessons learned, and good practices. Each survey has reported increasing numbers saying that agile software development helps them deliver software faster; improves their ability to manage changing customer priorities; and increases their productivity.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://stateofagile.versionone.com/why-agile/|title=2013 State of Agile report: Why Agile?|date=27 January 2014|publisher=stateofagile.com|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140828012224/http://stateofagile.versionone.com/why-agile/|archive-date=28 August 2014|url-status=dead|access-date=13 August 2014}}</ref> Surveys have also consistently shown better results with agile product development methods compared to classical project management.<ref>[http://www.status-quo-agile.net Status Quo Agile], Second study on success and forms of usage of agile methods. Retrieved 1 July 2015</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/191800169;jsessionid=2QJ23QRYM3H4PQE1GHPCKH4ATMY32JVN?queryText=agile+survey|title=Survey Says: Agile Works in Practice|last=Ambler|first=Scott|author-link=Scott Ambler|date=3 August 2006|work=Dr. Dobb's|access-date=3 June 2010|quote=Only 6% indicated that their productivity was lowered&nbsp;... No change in productivity was reported by 34% of respondents and 60% reported increased productivity&nbsp;... 66% [responded] that the quality is higher&nbsp;... 58% of organizations report improved satisfaction, whereas only 3% report reduced satisfaction.}}</ref> In balance, there are reports that some feel that agile development methods are still too young to enable extensive academic research of their success.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.agilemodeling.com/essays/proof.htm|title=Answering the "Where is the Proof That Agile Methods Work" Question|date=19 January 2007|publisher=Agilemodeling.com|access-date=2 April 2010}}</ref>

===Common agile software development pitfalls===
Organizations and teams implementing agile software development often face difficulties transitioning from more traditional methods such as [[waterfall development]], such as teams having an agile process forced on them.<ref name="The Art of Agile Development">{{harvnb|Shore|Warden|2008|p=47}}</ref> These are often termed ''agile anti-patterns'' or more commonly ''agile smells''. Below are some common examples:

====Lack of overall product design====
A goal of agile software development is to focus more on producing working software and less on documentation. This is in contrast to waterfall models where the process is often highly controlled and minor changes to the system require significant revision of supporting documentation. However, this does not justify completely doing without any analysis or design at all. Failure to pay attention to design can cause a team to proceed rapidly at first, but then to require significant rework as they attempt to scale up the system. One of the key features of agile software development is that it is iterative. When done correctly, agile software development allows the design to emerge as the system is developed and helps the team discover commonalities  and opportunities for re-use.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Beck|first1=Kent|title=Extreme Programming Explained|date=2000|publisher=Addison-Wesley|isbn=978-0201616415|pages=[https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi00beck/page/48 48–49]|url=https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi00beck/page/48}}</ref>

====Adding stories to an iteration in progress====
In agile software development, ''stories'' (similar to [[use case]] descriptions) are typically used to define requirements and an ''iteration'' is a short period of time during which the team commits to specific goals.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Rouse|first1=Margaret|title=Sprint (software development) definition|url=http://searchsoftwarequality.techtarget.com/definition/Scrum-sprint|website=searchsoftwarequality.techtarget.com|access-date=2 October 2015}}</ref> Adding stories to an iteration in progress is detrimental to a good flow of work. These should be added to the product backlog and prioritized for a subsequent iteration or in rare cases the iteration could be cancelled.<ref name="axisagile.com.au">{{cite web|last1=Goldstein|first1=Ilan|title=Sprint issues – when sprints turn into crawls|url=http://www.axisagile.com.au/blog/planning-and-metrics/sprint-issues-when-sprints-turn-into-crawls/|website=www.axisagile.com.au|access-date=2014-06-08|date=11 October 2011}}</ref>

This does not mean that a story cannot expand. Teams must deal with new information, which may produce additional tasks for a story. If the new information prevents the story from being completed during the iteration, then it should be carried over to a subsequent iteration. However, it should be prioritized against all remaining stories, as the new information may have changed the story's original priority.

====Lack of sponsor support====
Agile software development is often implemented as a grassroots effort in organizations by software development teams trying to optimize their development processes and ensure consistency in the software development life cycle. By not having sponsor support, teams may face difficulties and resistance from business partners, other development teams and management. Additionally, they may suffer without appropriate funding and resources.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://agile-only.com/master-thesis/project-mgmt/pr-and-rd|title=Project Roles and Responsibility Distribution|website=agile-only.com|access-date=2014-06-15}}</ref> This increases the likelihood of failure.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Bourne|first1=Lynda|title=What Does a Project Sponsor Really Do?|url=http://blogs.pmi.org/blog/voices_on_project_management/2012/04/what-does-a-project-sponsor-re.html|website=blogs.pmi.org|access-date=2014-06-08|archive-date=7 June 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140607221010/http://blogs.pmi.org/blog/voices_on_project_management/2012/04/what-does-a-project-sponsor-re.html|url-status=dead}}</ref>

====Insufficient training====
A survey performed by VersionOne found respondents cited insufficient training as the most significant cause for failed agile implementations<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.versionone.com/state_of_agile_development_survey/09/page5.asp|title=9th State of Agile Report|website=Stage of Agile Survey|publisher=VersionOne|access-date=2014-06-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150112225122/http://www.versionone.com/state_of_agile_development_survey/09/page5.asp|archive-date=12 January 2015|url-status=dead}}</ref> Teams have fallen into the trap of assuming the reduced processes of agile software development compared to other approaches such as waterfall means that there are no actual rules for agile software development. {{Citation needed|date=May 2018}}

====Product owner role is not properly filled====
The [[product owner]] is responsible for representing the business in the development activity and is often the most demanding role.<ref>{{cite book|author1=Sims, Chris |author2=Johnson, Hillary Louise |title=The Elements of Scrum|date=2011-02-15|publisher=Dymaxicon|page=73|edition=Kindle}}</ref>

A common mistake is to fill the product owner role with someone from the development team. This requires the team to make its own decisions on prioritization without real feedback from the business. They try to solve business issues internally or delay work as they reach outside the team for direction. This often leads to distraction and a breakdown in collaboration.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Rothman|first1=Johanna Rothman|title=When You Have No Product Owner at All|url=http://www.jrothman.com/blog/mpd/2011/08/when-you-have-no-product-owner-at-all.html|website=www.jrothman.com|access-date=2014-06-08|date=25 August 2011}}</ref>

====Teams are not focused====
Agile software development requires teams to meet product commitments, which means they should focus on work for only that product. However, team members who appear to have spare capacity are often expected to take on other work, which makes it difficult for them to help complete the work to which their team had committed.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Fox|first1=Alyssa|title=Working on Multiple Agile Teams|url=http://techwhirl.com/working-multiple-agile-teams/|website=techwhirl.com/|access-date=2014-06-14|date=8 April 2014}}</ref>

====Excessive preparation/planning====
Teams may fall into the trap of spending too much time preparing or planning. This is a common trap for teams less familiar with agile software development where the teams feel obliged to have a complete understanding and specification of all stories. Teams should be prepared to move forward with only those stories in which they have confidence, then during the iteration continue to discover and prepare work for subsequent iterations (often referred to as [[refinement (computing)|backlog refinement]] or grooming).

====Problem-solving in the daily standup====
A daily standup should be a focused, timely meeting where all team members disseminate information. If problem-solving occurs, it often can involve only certain team members and potentially is not the best use of the entire team's time. If during the daily standup the team starts diving into problem-solving, it should be set aside until a sub-team can discuss, usually immediately after the standup completes.<ref>{{cite web|title=Daily Scrum Meeting|url=http://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/agile/scrum/daily-scrum|website=www.mountaingoatsoftware.com|access-date=2014-06-14}}</ref>

====Assigning tasks====
One of the intended benefits of agile software development is to empower the team to make choices, as they are closest to the problem. Additionally, they should make choices as close to implementation as possible, to use more timely information in the decision. If team members are assigned tasks by others or too early in the process, the benefits of localized and timely decision making can be lost.<ref name="Effective Sprint Planning">{{cite web|last1=May |first1=Robert |title=Effective Sprint Planning |url=http://www.agileexecutives.org/Blogs/tabid/66/EntryId/18/Effective-Sprint-Planning.aspx |website=www.agileexecutives.org |access-date=2014-06-14 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140628102810/http://www.agileexecutives.org/Blogs/tabid/66/EntryId/18/Effective-Sprint-Planning.aspx |archive-date=28 June 2014 }}</ref>

Being assigned work also constrains team members into certain roles (for example, team member A must always do the database work), which limits opportunities for cross-training.<ref name="Effective Sprint Planning"/> Team members themselves can choose to take on tasks that stretch their abilities and provide cross-training opportunities.

====Scrum master as a contributor====
In the Scrum framework, which claims to be consistent with agile values and principles, the ''scrum master'' role is accountable for ensuring the scrum process is followed and for coaching the scrum team through that process. A common pitfall is for a scrum master to act as a contributor. While not prohibited by the Scrum framework, the scrum master needs to ensure they have the capacity to act in the role of scrum master first and not work on development tasks. A scrum master's role is to facilitate the process rather than create the product.<ref name="agileconnection.com">{{cite web|last1=Berczuk|first1=Steve|title=Mission Possible: ScrumMaster and Technical Contributor|url=http://www.agileconnection.com/article/mission-possible-scrummaster-and-technical-contributor?page=0%2C1|website=www.agileconnection.com|access-date=2014-06-14}}</ref>

Having the scrum master also multitasking may result in too many context switches to be productive. Additionally, as a scrum master is responsible for ensuring roadblocks are removed so that the team can make forward progress, the benefit gained by individual tasks moving forward may not outweigh roadblocks that are deferred due to lack of capacity.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://aristeksystems.com/blog/how-not-to-burn-your-budget-with-agile-scrum/| title=How to Implement Agile Scrum | accessdate=2022-01-04}}</ref>

====Lack of test automation====
{{Further|Test automation}}
Due to the iterative nature of agile development, multiple rounds of testing are often needed. Automated testing helps reduce the impact of repeated unit, integration, and regression tests and frees developers and testers to focus on higher value work.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Namta|first1=Rajneesh|title=Thoughts on Test Automation in Agile|url=http://www.infoq.com/articles/thoughts-on-test-automation-in-agile|website=www.infoq.com|access-date=2014-06-14}}</ref>

Test automation also supports continued [[refactoring]] required by iterative software development. Allowing a developer to quickly run tests to confirm refactoring has not modified the functionality of the application may reduce the workload and increase confidence that cleanup efforts have not introduced new defects.

====Allowing technical debt to build up====
{{Further|Technical debt}}
Focusing on delivering new functionality may result in increased [[technical debt]]. The team must allow themselves time for defect remediation and refactoring. Technical debt hinders planning abilities by increasing the amount of unscheduled work as production defects distract the team from further progress.<ref name="Technical Debt + Red October">{{cite web|last1 = Band|first1 = Zvi|title = Technical Debt + Red October| work=Zvi Band |url = http://zviband.com/posts/technical-debt-red-october/|access-date = 8 June 2014|date = 22 March 2014}}</ref>

As the system evolves it is important to [[Code refactoring|refactor]].<ref>{{cite web|last1=Shore|first1=James|title=The Art of Agile Development: Refactoring|url=http://www.jamesshore.com/Agile-Book/refactoring.html|website=www.jamesshore.com|access-date=2014-06-14}}</ref> Over time the lack of constant maintenance causes increasing defects and development costs.<ref name="Technical Debt + Red October"/>

====Attempting to take on too much in an iteration====
A common misconception is that agile software development allows continuous change, however an iteration backlog is an agreement of what work can be completed during an iteration.<ref>{{cite web|title=Step 4: Sprint Planning (Tasks)|url=http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-to-implement-scrum-in-10-easy-steps-step-4-sprint-planning-tasks/|website=www.allaboutagile.com|access-date=2014-06-14|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140629145319/http://www.allaboutagile.com/how-to-implement-scrum-in-10-easy-steps-step-4-sprint-planning-tasks/|archive-date=29 June 2014|url-status=dead}}</ref> Having too much [[Work in process|work-in-progress (WIP)]] results in inefficiencies such as [[Human multitasking|context-switching]] and queueing.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://leankit.com/blog/2014/03/limiting-work-in-progress/|title=Why Limiting Your Work-in-Progress Matters|website=leankit.com|last1=George|first1=Claire|date=3 March 2014|access-date=2014-06-14}}</ref> The team must avoid feeling pressured into taking on additional work.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/agile/scrum/sprint-planning-meeting/|website=www.mountaingoatsoftware.com|access-date=2014-06-14|title=Sprint Planning Meeting}}</ref>

====Fixed time, resources, scope, and quality====
Agile software development fixes time (iteration duration), quality, and ideally resources in advance (though maintaining fixed resources may be difficult if developers are often pulled away from tasks to handle production incidents), while the [[Scope (project management)|scope]] remains variable. The customer or product owner often pushes for a fixed scope for an iteration. However, teams should be reluctant to commit to the locked time, resources and scope (commonly known as the [[project management triangle]]). Efforts to add scope to the fixed time and resources of agile software development may result in decreased quality.<ref name="adeptechllc.com">{{cite web|last1=McMillan |first1=Keith |title=Time, Resources, Scope... and Quality. |url=http://www.adeptechllc.com/2010/05/13/time-resources-scope-and-quality/ |website=www.adeptechllc.com |date=13 May 2010 |access-date=2014-06-15 }}</ref>

====Developer burnout====
Due to the focused pace and continuous nature of agile practices, there is a heightened risk of burnout among members of the delivery team.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Current study on limitations of Agile|journal=Procedia Computer Science|volume=78|pages=291–297|date=January 2016|doi=10.1016/j.procs.2016.02.056|doi-access=free}}</ref>

== Agile management ==
{{main|Agile management}}
Agile project management is an iterative development process, where feedback is continuously gathered from users and stakeholders to create the right user experience.  Different methods can be used to perform an agile process, these include [[Scrum (software development)|scrum]], [[extreme programming]], [[Lean software development|lean]] and [[Kanban (development)|kanban]].<ref name="europeanbusinessreview.com">{{Cite web |date=1 November 2019 |title=The Procurement Call for Agile, What does it mean? |url=https://www.europeanbusinessreview.com/the-procurement-call-for-agile-what-does-it-mean}}</ref>
The term ''agile management'' is applied to an iterative, incremental method of managing the design and build activities of engineering, information technology and other business areas that aim to provide new product or service development in a highly flexible and interactive manner, based on the principles expressed in the ''Manifesto for Agile Software Development''.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Moran |first=Alan |title=Managing Agile: Strategy, Implementation, Organisation and People |date=2015 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-319-16262-1}}</ref>
Agile project management metrics help reduce confusion, identify weak points, and measure team's performance throughout the development cycle. Supply chain agility is the ability of a supply chain to cope with uncertainty and variability on offer and demand. An agile supply chain can increase and reduce its capacity rapidly, so it can adapt to a fast-changing customer demand. Finally, strategic agility is the ability of an organisation to change its course of action as its environment is evolving. The key for strategic agility is to recognize external changes early enough and to allocate resources to adapt to these changing environments.<ref name="europeanbusinessreview.com" />

Agile X techniques may also be called [[extreme project management]]. It is a variant of [[iterative and incremental development|iterative life cycle]]<ref>{{Cite web |date=2008-10-22 |title=Which Life Cycle Is Best for Your Project? |url=https://pmhut.com/which-life-cycle-is-best-for-your-project |access-date=2009-10-23 |website=PMHut |language=en-US}}</ref> where [[deliverable]]s are submitted in stages. The main difference between agile and iterative development is that agile methods complete small portions of the deliverables in each delivery cycle (iteration),<ref>{{Cite web |title=Agile Project Management |url=http://www.versionone.com/agile-project-management/ |access-date=1 June 2015 |website=VersionOne}}</ref> while iterative methods evolve the entire set of deliverables over time, completing them near the end of the project. Both iterative and agile methods were developed as a reaction to various obstacles that developed in more sequential forms of project organization. For example, as technology projects grow in complexity, end users tend to have difficulty defining the long-term requirements without being able to view progressive prototypes. Projects that develop in iterations can constantly gather feedback to help refine those requirements.

Agile management also offers a simple framework promoting communication and reflection on past work amongst [[Project team|team]] members.<ref>{{Cite web |title=What is Agile Management? |url=http://www.project-laneways.com.au/certification-courses/agilepm/what-is-agile-management |access-date=1 June 2015 |publisher=Project Laneways}}</ref> Teams who were using traditional waterfall planning and adopted the agile way of development typically go through a transformation phase and often take help from agile coaches who help guide the teams through a smoother transformation. There are typically two styles of agile coaching: push-based and pull-based agile coaching. Here a "push-system" can refer to an upfront estimation of what tasks can be fitted into a sprint (pushing work) e.g. typical with scrum; whereas a "pull system" can refer to an environment where tasks are only performed when capacity is available.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Benson |first1=Jim |title=Personal Kanban: mapping work, navigating life |last2=De Maria Barry |first2=Tonianne |date=2011 |publisher=Modus Cooperandi Press |isbn=978-1-4538-0226-7 |edition=1st |location=Seattle, WA |page=38}}</ref> Agile management approaches have also been employed and adapted to the business and government sectors. For example, within the [[federal government of the United States]], the [[United States Agency for International Development]] (USAID) is employing a collaborative project management approach that focuses on incorporating [[collaborating, learning and adapting]] (CLA) strategies to iterate and adapt programming.<ref>USAID. [https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/201.pdf "ADS Chapter 201 Program Cycle Operational Policy"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191023195937/https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/201.pdf |date=23 October 2019 }}. Retrieved 19 April 2017</ref>

Agile methods are mentioned in the ''Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge'' (''PMBOK Guide 6th Edition'') under the '''Product Development Lifecycle''' definition:

{{blockquote|Within a project life cycle, there are generally one or more phases
that are associated with the development of the product, service, or result. These are called a development life cycle (...) Adaptive life cycles are agile, iterative, or incremental. The detailed scope is defined and approved before the start of an iteration. Adaptive life cycles are also referred to as agile or change-driven life cycles.<ref>[[Project Management Institute]], ''[[A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge]]'' (PMBOK Guide), Sixth Edition</ref>}}

=== Applications outside software development ===
[[File:Agile Brazil 2014 conference entrance.jpg|Agile Brazil 2014 conference|thumb|right]]
According to Jean-Loup Richet (research fellow at [[ESSEC]] Institute for Strategic Innovation & Services) "this approach can be leveraged effectively for non-software products and for project management in general, especially in areas of innovation and uncertainty." The result is a product or project that best meets current customer needs and is delivered with minimal costs, waste, and time, enabling companies to achieve bottom line gains earlier than via traditional approaches.<ref>Richet, Jean-Loup (2013). ''Agile Innovation''. Cases and Applied Research, n°31. ESSEC-ISIS. {{ISBN|978-2-36456-091-8}}</ref>

Agile software development methods have been extensively used for development of software products and some of them use certain characteristics of software, such as [[Object-oriented analysis and design|object technologies]].<ref name="Smith2007">{{Cite book |last=Smith |first=Preston G |title=Flexible Product Development |publisher=Jossey-Bass |year=2007 |isbn=978-0-7879-9584-3 |page=25}}</ref> However, these techniques can be applied to the development of non-software products, such as computers, medical devices, food, clothing, and music.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Newton Lee |title="Getting on the Billboard Charts: Music Production as Agile Software Development," ''Digital Da Vinci: Computers in Music'' |publisher=Springer Science+Business Media |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-4939-0535-5}}</ref> Agile software development methods have been used in non-development [[IT infrastructure]] [[IT infrastructure deployment|deployments and migrations]]. Some of the wider principles of agile software development have also found application in general management<ref>{{Cite book |last=Moran, Alan |title=Managing Agile: Strategy, Implementation, Organisation and People |publisher=Springer Verlag |year=2015 |isbn=978-3-319-16262-1}}</ref> (e.g., strategy, governance, risk, finance) under the terms [[business agility]] or agile business management. Agile software methodologies have also been adopted for use with the [[learning engineering]] process, an iterative data-informed process that applies [[human-centered design]], and data informed decision-making to support learners and their development.<ref>{{Citation |last1=Barrett |first1=M. |title=Learning Engineering Toolkit |date=2022 |pages=269–278 |chapter=Lean-Agile Development Tools |publisher=Routledge |doi=10.4324/9781003276579-16 |last2=Goodell |first2=J.|isbn=978-1-003-27657-9 }}</ref>

Agile software development paradigms can be used in other areas of life such as raising children. Its success in child development might be founded on some basic management principles; communication, adaptation, and awareness. In a [[TED (conference)|TED Talk]], Bruce Feiler shared how he applied basic agile paradigms to household management and raising children.<ref>[http://www.ted.com/talks/bruce_feiler_agile_programming_for_your_family.html "Agile programming – for your family"].</ref>

== Criticism ==
Agile practices have been cited as potentially inefficient in large organizations and certain types of development.<ref>{{cite book|url=http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1380615|first=Craig|last=Larman|author2=Bas Vodde|title=Top Ten Organizational Impediments to Large-Scale Agile Adoption |publisher=InformIT |date=2009-08-13}}</ref> Many organizations believe that agile software development methodologies are too extreme and adopt a hybrid approach<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.binfire.com/blog/2016/07/hybrid-project-management-methodology//|title=Introduction to Hybrid project management|work=Collaboration Corner |date=20 July 2016}}</ref> that mixes elements of agile software development and plan-driven approaches.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Barlow|first=Jordan B.|author2=Justin Scott Giboney|author3=Mark Jeffery Keith|author4=David W. Wilson|author5=Ryan M. Schuetzler|author6=Paul Benjamin Lowry|author7= Anthony Vance|title=Overview and Guidance on Agile Development in Large Organizations|journal=Communications of the Association for Information Systems|year=2011|volume=29|issue=1|pages=25–44|doi=10.17705/1CAIS.02902|doi-access=free}}</ref> Some methods, such as [[dynamic systems development method]] (DSDM) attempt this in a disciplined way, without sacrificing fundamental principles.

The increasing adoption of agile practices has also been criticized as being a [[management fad]] that simply describes existing good practices under new jargon, promotes a ''one size fits all'' mindset towards development strategies, and wrongly emphasizes method over results.<ref>{{cite web|url = http://www.batimes.com/kupe-kupersmith/agile-is-a-fad.html|title = Agile is a Fad|last = Kupersmith|first = Kupe| date=4 July 2011 }}</ref>

[[Alistair Cockburn]] organized a celebration of the 10th anniversary of the ''Manifesto for Agile Software Development'' in Snowbird, Utah on 12 February 2011, gathering some 30+ people who had been involved at the original meeting and since. A list of about 20 [[elephant in the room|elephants in the room]] ('undiscussable' agile topics/issues) were collected, including aspects: the alliances, failures and limitations of agile software development practices and context (possible causes: commercial interests, decontextualization, no obvious way to make progress based on failure, limited objective evidence, cognitive biases and reasoning fallacies), politics and culture.<ref name="TeenAgile">{{cite web|url=http://www.infoq.com/articles/agile-teenage-crisis|first=Philippe|last=Kruchten|title=Agile's Teenage Crisis? |publisher=InfoQ |date=2011-06-20}}</ref> As [[Philippe Kruchten]] wrote:

{{Blockquote
|text=The agile movement is in some ways a bit like a teenager: very self-conscious, checking constantly its appearance in a mirror, accepting few criticisms, only interested in being with its peers, rejecting en bloc all wisdom from the past, just because it is from the past, adopting fads and new jargon, at times cocky and arrogant. But I have no doubts that it will mature further, become more open to the outside world, more reflective, and therefore, more effective.
|author=Philippe Kruchten<ref name="TeenAgile" />}}

The "Manifesto" may have had a negative impact on higher education management and leadership, where it suggested to administrators that slower traditional and deliberative processes should be replaced with more "nimble" ones. The concept rarely found acceptance among university faculty.<ref>Richard Utz, "Against Adminspeak," [https://www.chronicle.com/article/Against-Adminspeak/249047?key=hsZMErKIgGC276GPIxqHkSP5jbKbjZo7inN_XME_7x91_awBNokn0OtP-fqf8M6Ic0s4X016U01jTmlpaGVtSElwWjVONE9iRjI5UW9BdldZNVlTVEotMUVyVQ Chronicle of Higher Education], 24 June 2020.</ref>

Another criticism is that in many ways, agile management and traditional management practices end up being in opposition to one another. A common criticism of this practice is that the time spent attempting to learn and implement the practice is too costly, despite potential benefits. A transition from traditional management to agile management requires total submission to agile and a firm commitment from all members of the organization to seeing the process through. Issues like unequal results across the organization, too much change for employees' ability to handle, or a lack of guarantees at the end of the transformation are just a few examples.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Cohn|first=Mike|title=Succeeding With Agile|publisher=Pearson|year=2015|isbn=978-0-321-57936-2|pages=5–10}}</ref>

== See also ==
* [[Cross-functional team]]
* [[Scrum (software development)]]
* [[Fail fast (business)]], a related subject in business management
* [[Kanban]]
* [[Agile leadership]]
* [[Agile contracts]]
* [[Rational unified process]]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==Further reading==
{{Refbegin|2}} 
*{{cite web |first1=P. |last1=Abrahamsson |last2=Salo |first2=O. |last3=Ronkainen |first3=J. |last4=Warsta |first4=J. |title=Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis |date=2002 |publisher=VTT Publications |id=478 |url=http://agile.vtt.fi/publications.html |access-date=20 February 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110907061542/http://agile.vtt.fi/publications.html |archive-date=7 September 2011 |url-status=dead }}
* {{cite book |title=Introduction to Agile Methods |first1=Sondra |last1=Ashmore |first2=Kristin |last2=Runyan |publisher=Addison-Wesley |year=2014 |isbn=978-0321929563}}
*{{cite journal|last=Barlow|first=Jordan B.|author2=Justin Scott Giboney|author3=Mark Jeffery Keith|author4=David W. Wilson|author5=Ryan M. Schuetzler|author6=Paul Benjamin Lowry|author7= Anthony Vance|title=Overview and Guidance on Agile Development in Large Organizations|journal=Communications of the Association for Information Systems|year=2011|volume=29|issue=1|pages=25–44|doi=10.17705/1CAIS.02902|doi-access=free}}
*{{cite book |last1=Cohen |first1=D. |last2=Lindvall |first2=M. |last3=Costa |first3=P. |chapter=An introduction to agile methods |editor-first=Marvin |editor1-link=Marvin Victor Zelkowitz |editor-last=Zelkowitz |series=Advances in Computers |title=Advances in Software Engineering |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=N-06uoJ9iSsC&pg=PA1 |date=2004 |publisher=Academic Press |isbn=978-0-08-047190-7 |pages=1–66 |volume=62}}
*{{cite book |title= Agile Analytics: A Value-Driven Approach to Business Intelligence and Data Warehousing |last=Collier|first=Ken W. |year=2011 |publisher= Pearson Education |isbn=9780321669544 |quote=What is a self-organizing team?}}
*{{cite book |first1=Torgeir |last1=Dingsøyr |first2=Tore |last2=Dybå |first3=Nils Brede |last3=Moe |title=Agile Software Development: Current Research and Future Directions |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JRhGAAAAQBAJ |date=2010 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-642-12575-1 }}
*{{cite book|last=Fowler|first=Martin|chapter=Is Design Dead?|chapter-url=http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/designDead.html|pages=[https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi0000succ/page/3 3–18]|editor-first=Giancarlo|editor-last=Succi|editor2-first=Michele|editor2-last=Marchesi|title=Extreme Programming Examined|year=2001|publisher=Addison-Wesley|isbn=978-0-201-71040-3|ref={{harvid|Succi|Marchesi|2001}}|url=https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi0000succ/page/3}}
*{{cite journal |first1=Craig |last1=Larman |last2=Basili |first2=Victor R.  |s2cid=9240477 |title=Iterative and Incremental Development: A Brief History |journal=IEEE Computer |volume=36 |issue=3 |pages=47–56 |date=June 2003 |doi=10.1109/MC.2003.1204375 }}
*{{cite journal | publisher = MITRE | title =Handbook for Implementing Agile in Department of Defense Information Technology Acquisition | journal =The Mitre Corporation | url=https://www.mitre.org/publications/technical-papers/handbook-for-implementing-agile-in-department-of-defense-information-technology-acquisition| date =8 September 2013 | last1 =Casagni | first1 =Michelle | last2 =Benito | first2 =Robert | last3 =Mayfield | first3 =Kathleen M. | last4 =Northern | first4 =Carlton }} 
*{{cite book|first=Alan|last=Moran|title=Managing Agile: Strategy, Implementation, Organisation and People|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=I6l_BwAAQBAJ|date=2015|publisher=Springer|isbn=978-3-319-16262-1}}
*{{cite web|first=Dirk|last=Riehle|title=A Comparison of the Value Systems of Adaptive Software Development and Extreme Programming: How Methodologies May Learn From Each Other|url=http://www.riehle.org/computer-science/research/2000/xp-2000.html}} In {{harvnb|Succi|Marchesi|2001}}
*{{cite book|last=Rubin |first=Kenneth |title=Essential Scrum. A Practical Guide to the Most Popular Agile Process |date=2013 |publisher=Addison-Wesley |language=EN |isbn=978-0-13-704329-3}}
* {{cite book |first1=James |last1=Shore |first2=Shane |last2=Warden |title=The Art of Agile Development |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2q6bAgAAQBAJ |date=2008 |publisher=O'Reilly Media |isbn=978-0-596-52767-9 }}
* {{cite book|last=Project Management Institute|title=A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide)|date=2021|others=Project Management Institute|isbn=978-1-62825-664-2
|edition=7th|location=Newtown Square, PA}}
* {{cite book|first1=M.|last1=Stephens|first2=D.|last2=Rosenberg|title=Extreme Programming Refactored: The Case Against XP|publisher=Apress|year=2003|isbn=978-1-59059-096-6|url=https://archive.org/details/extremeprogrammi00matt}}
*{{citation|title=Heavyweight project organizationHEAVYWEIGHT PROJECT ORGANIZATION |date=2000 |url=https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-0612-8_400 |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Production and Manufacturing Management |pages=261–262 |editor-last=Swamidass |editor-first=P. M. |place=Boston, MA |publisher=Springer US |language=en |doi=10.1007/1-4020-0612-8_400 |isbn=978-1-4020-0612-8 |access-date=2022-06-22|url-access=subscription }}
*{{cite journal |last1=Takeuchi |first1=Hirotaka |last2=Nonaka |first2=Ikujiro |title=The New New Product Development Game |journal=[[Harvard Business Review]] |date=1 January 1986 |url=https://hbr.org/1986/01/the-new-new-product-development-game |access-date=25 July 2021 |issn=0017-8012}}
*{{cite web|url=https://www.binfire.com/blog/2016/07/hybrid-project-management-methodology//|title=Introduction to Hybrid project management|work=Collaboration Corner |date=20 July 2016}}
{{Refend}}

==External links==
* [http://agilemanifesto.org/ Agile Manifesto]
* [https://www.agilealliance.org/agile101/agile-glossary/ Agile Glossary] of the Agile Alliance
* [http://martinfowler.com/articles/newMethodology.html The New Methodology] - [[Martin Fowler (software engineer)|Martin Fowler]]'s description of the background to agile methods


{{Software engineering}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Agile Software Development}}
[[Category:Agile software development| ]]
[[Category:Software project management]]
[[Category:Software development]]
[[Category:Software engineering]]
[[Category:Software development philosophies]]