Intelligent Agile Method Framework

Marko Janković, Marko Bajec, Ghazaleh Khodabandelou, Rebecca Deneckere, Charlotte Hug, Camille Salinesi


The paper addresses the problem of the low usage of software development methods in software development practice. This has been recognized as one of the key reasons for failures in software development projects and a contributor to the low quality of software. We introduce a novel approach that could help to improve the maturity of software development processes. The approach is based on the method engineering principles taking into account the limitations that hinder its use in practice. The main objective of our research is to show that the method engineering concepts are applicable in real settings and that could contribute to the higher quality of software development processes and their products.


  1. Bajec, M., Vavpotic?, D., and Krisper, M. (2007). Practicedriven approach for creating project-specific software development methods. Information and Software Technology, 49(4):345-365.
  2. Bajec, M. and Vavpotic, D. (2008). A framework and tool-support for reengineering software development methods. Informatica, Lith. Acad. Sci., 19(3):321- 344.
  3. Bekkers, W., van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S., and Mahieu, A. (2008). The influence of situational factors in software product management: An empirical study. In Second International Workshop on Software Product Management, 2008. IWSPM 7808, pages 41 - 48.
  4. Bloch, M., Blumberg, S., and Laartz, J. (2012). Delivering large-scale it projects on time, on budget, and on value. Retrieved from technology/.
  5. Brinkkemper, S. (1996). Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Information and Software Technology, 38(4):275-280.
  6. Brinkkemper, S., Saeki, M., and Harmsen, F. (1998). Assembly techniques for method engineering. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, CAiSE 7898, page 381-400, London, UK, UK. Springer-Verlag.
  7. Deneckere, R., Iacovelli, A., Kornyshova, E., and Souveyet, C. (2008). From method fragments to method services. In Proc. Of EMMSAD'08, pages 80-96, Montpellier, France.
  8. Dyba°, T. and Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology, 50(9-10):833-859.
  9. Fitzgerald, B. and Hartnett, G. (2005). A study of the use of agile methods within intel. In Baskerville, R., Mathiassen, L., Pries-Heje, J., and DeGross, J., editors, Business Agility and Information Technology Diffusion, volume 180 of IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, pages 187-202. Springer US.
  10. García, J., Amescua, A., Sánchez, M.-I., and Bermón, L. (2011). Design guidelines for software processes knowledge repository development. Information and Software Technology, 53(8):834-850.
  11. Garcia, F., Vizcaino, A., and Ebert, C. (2011). Process management tools. IEEE Software, 28(2):15 -18.
  12. Henderson-Sellers, B. and Ralyté, J. (2010). Situational Method Engineering: State-of-the-Art Review. Journal Of Universal Computer Science, 16(3):424-478.
  13. Hug, C., Deneckère, R., and Salinesi, C. (2012). Map-tbs: Map process enactment traces and analysis. In RCIS, pages 1-6.
  14. Karlsson, F. and A°gerfalk, P. J. (2004). Method configuration: adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Information and Software Technology, 46(9):619-633.
  15. Karlsson, F. and A°gerfalk, P. J. (2012). MC sandbox: Devising a tool for method-user-centered method configuration. Information and Software Technology, 54(5):501-516.
  16. Khodabandelou, G., Hug, C., Deneckère, R., and Salinesi, C. (2013a). Process mining versus intention mining. In Procs. EMMSAD'13, Valencia, Spain.
  17. Khodabandelou, G., Hug, C., Deneckère, R., and Salinesi, C. (2013b). Supervised intentional process models discovery using hidden markov models. In Procs. RCIS'13, Paris, France.
  18. Khodabandelou, G., Hug, C., Deneckère, R., Salinesi, C., Bajec, M., Kornyshova, E., and Jankovic, M. (2013c). A systematic review and selection of cots products to trace method enactment. In Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on information Systems, Utrecht, Netherland.
  19. Laanti, M., Salo, O., and Abrahamsson, P. (2011). Agile methods rapidly replacing traditional methods at nokia: A survey of opinions on agile transformation. Information and Software Technology, 53(3):276- 290.
  20. Mirbel, I. and Ralyté, J. (2006). Situational method engineering: combining assembly-based and roadmapdriven approaches. Requirements Engineering, 11(1):58-78.
  21. Mirbel, I. and Rivieres, V. d. (2002). Adapting analysis and design to software context: The JECKO approach. In Bellahsène, Z., Patel, D., and Rolland, C., editors, Object-Oriented Information Systems, number 2425 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 223- 228. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  22. Mohan, K. and Ahlemann, F. (2011). What methodology attributes are critical for potential users? understanding the effect of human needs. In Mouratidis, H. and Rolland, C., editors, Advanced Information Systems Engineering, volume 6741 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 314-328. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.
  23. Ralyté, J. and Rolland, C. (2001). An assembly process model for method engineering. In Dittrich, K. R., Geppert, A., and Norrie, M. C., editors, Advanced Information Systems Engineering, number 2068 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 267-283. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  24. Riemenschneider, C., Hardgrave, B., and Davis, F. (2002). Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: a comparison of five theoretical models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 28(12):1135 - 1145.
  25. van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S., Souer, J., and Versendaal, J. (2006). A situational implementation method for web-based content management systemapplications: method engineering and validation in practice. Software Process: Improvement and Practice, 11(5):521-538.
  26. Z?vanut, B. and Bajec, M. (2010). A tool for IT process construction. Information and Software Technology, 52(4):397-410.
  27. Vavpotic, D. and Bajec, M. (2009). An approach for concurrent evaluation of technical and social aspects of software development methodologies. Information and Software Technology, 51(2):528-545.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Janković M., Bajec M., Khodabandelou G., Deneckere R., Hug C. and Salinesi C. (2013). Intelligent Agile Method Framework . In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE, ISBN 978-989-8565-62-4, pages 232-237. DOI: 10.5220/0004562702320237

in Bibtex Style

author={Marko Janković and Marko Bajec and Ghazaleh Khodabandelou and Rebecca Deneckere and Charlotte Hug and Camille Salinesi},
title={Intelligent Agile Method Framework},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE,},

in EndNote Style

JO - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering - Volume 1: ENASE,
TI - Intelligent Agile Method Framework
SN - 978-989-8565-62-4
AU - Janković M.
AU - Bajec M.
AU - Khodabandelou G.
AU - Deneckere R.
AU - Hug C.
AU - Salinesi C.
PY - 2013
SP - 232
EP - 237
DO - 10.5220/0004562702320237