EC-21 - Barry Boehm University of Southern California...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–7. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Barry Boehm University of Southern California Richard Turner OUSD(AT&L)/DS/SE (George Washington University) STC 2004 Tutorial April 19, 2004 Balancing Agility and Discipline: Balancing Agility and Discipline: Evaluating and Integrating Agile and Plan- Evaluating and Integrating Agile and Plan- Driven Methods Driven Methods Based on Balancing Agility and Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed , B. Boehm and R. Turner, Addison Wesley, 2004 4/19/04 2 Outline Tutorial learning objectives Survey of assumptions about participants General software trends and implications Sources of perplexity about agile, plan-driven methods Overview of agile and plan-driven methods XP, TSP days in the life Comparisons of differences, strengths, weaknesses Risk-based balance of agility and discipline Small, medium, large examples Observations and Way Forward Hands-on exercise Conclusions; review of learning objectives 4/19/04 3 Tutorial Learning Objectives Practitioners and managers Understand agile, plan-driven method strengths, difficulties Learn risk-based approach to tailor hybrid methods Practice in formulating organizational strategy Researchers Understand research issues, opportunities Techniques for achieving rapid quality Empirical analyses Educators Understand differences in agile, plan-driven approaches Understand teaching challenges, opportunities Survey courses, project courses 4/19/04 4 Assumptions About Participants - Surveyed at Tutorial Generally familiar with plan-driven methods Waterfall, incremental, spiral, RUP, PSP/TSP Software CMM, CMMI, SPICE, ISO I2207 Less familiar with agile methods XP, Scrum, Crystal, DSDM, FDD Representative of mixed domains Large/small projects, research, education Variety of software applications domains Increasing need for high software dependability Increasing software complexity, speed of change 4/19/04 5 Information Technology Trends Traditional Development Standalone systems Stable requirements Rqts. determine capabilities Control over evolution Enough time to keep stable Stable jobs Failures noncritical Reductionist systems Repeatability-oriented process, maturity models Current/Future Trends Everything connected (maybe) Rapid requirements change COTS capabilities determine rqts. No control over COTS evolution Ever-decreasing cycle times Outsourced jobs Failures critical Complex, adaptive, emergent systems of systems Adaptive process models 4/19/04 6 Background Two approaches to software development Disciplined (SW-CMM, document-based, heavy process)...
View Full Document

Page1 / 90

EC-21 - Barry Boehm University of Southern California...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 7. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online