The Integration of Agile Development and Model Driven Development

A Systematic Literature Review

Hessa Alfraihi and Kevin Lano

Dept. of Informatics, King’s College London, London, U.K.

Keywords:

Model-Driven Development, Agile, Agile Model-Driven Development, Systematic Literature Review.

Abstract:

In this paper, we present a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) on combining Agile development and Model-

Driven Development (MDD). The objectives of this paper are to identify what are the main characteristics of

current Agile Model-Driven Development (Agile MDD) approaches, as well as the beneﬁts and the problems

of adopting these approaches. Fifteen publications have been identiﬁed and selected as primary studies on

which we conducted the analysis. The results show that Agile development and MDD can coexist and beneﬁt

from their integration. However, combining Agile and MDD is still in its early stages and more effort is

required in research to advance this area. The main contributions of this paper are: detailed and condensed

results in the context of current Agile MDD approaches, detailed results on the beneﬁts of Agile MDD in

practice, and the observed problems and challenges of the current Agile MDD approaches.

1 INTRODUCTION

Agile methods are lightweight software development

processes that emerged as a reaction to plan-driven

limitations by compromising between no process and

excessive process (Fowler, 2005). They impose an

iterative approach to develop systems incrementally.

Agile methods include Extreme Programming (XP)

(Beck and Fowler, 2001), Scrum (Schwaber and Bee-

dle, 2002), Crystal (Cockburn, 2002), etc. Each of

these share common principles and values deﬁned by

the Agile Manifesto (Beck, 2001).

Model-Driven Development (MDD) methods

(Selic, 2003) have emerged as a new software devel-

opment paradigm where models play a fundamental

role. They are used to specify the required system and

then to automatically generate the source code. MDD

is established with the aim of raising the level of ab-

straction and increasing automation in code genera-

tion (Selic, 2003; Frankel, 2003). In this way, MDD

claims to improve productivity, portability, interop-

erability and maintainability of the systems (Kleppe

et al., 2003).

The integration of Agile and MDD (Agile MDD)

is of growing interest for many reasons. Firstly, the

beneﬁts that Agile and MDD provide can lead to

improved software development (Vijayasarathy and

Turk, 2008; ?). Secondly, MDD can be considered

as a heavyweight process which can be a barrier to

industry adoption, and we believe that adding agility

to it will ease its adoption. Moreover, there exist fun-

damental differences and conﬂicts between Agile and

MDD that might make the integration quite challeng-

ing.

This paper provides a detailed SLR on the inte-

gration of Agile methods and MDD. This SLR iden-

tiﬁes the main characteristic of current Agile MDD

approaches and explores the beneﬁts as well as the

problems encountered by these approaches. The re-

mainder of this paper is structured as follows: in Sec-

tion 2, we describe our research methodology that we

followed to conduct the SLR. In Section 3, we present

the main results of our SLR while in Section 4 we an-

swer the research questions and present the data anal-

yses from our ﬁndings. Section 5 presents the related

work followed by a conclusion of this paper in Sec-

tion 6.

2 REVIEW METHOD

This review has been undertaken based on the guide-

lines provided by Kitchenham (Kitchenham, 2004).

The steps in SLR are elaborated in the following sub-

sections.

Alfraihi H. and Lano K.

The Integration of Agile Development and Model Driven Development - A Systematic Literature Review.

DOI: 10.5220/0006207004510458

In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development (MODELSWARD 2017), pages 451-458

ISBN: 978-989-758-210-3

 2017 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All r ights reserved

451

2.1 Research Questions

In order to investigate the empirical evidence of

current Agile MDD approaches, we identiﬁed the

following questions:

RQ1: What are the main characteristics of current

Agile MDD approaches?

RQ2: What are the beneﬁts of adopting Agile MDD

for the software development process?

RQ3: What are the problems and challenges of

adopting Agile MDD?

2.2 Source and Primary Studies

Selection

In this study, we carried out an automatic search

within the following digital libraries and databases:

ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, SpringerLink

(MetaPress), ScienceDirect (Elsevier), and Google

Scholar. To make sure that we retrieve the most

relevant papers, search strings and keywords should

be well-chosen. Therefore, based on our research

questions we used the following search strings (with

adaptations for some digital libraries): (“ agile” OR

“lightweight”) AND (“model-driven” OR “model-

based). To complement the automatic search, a man-

ual search was conducted on relevant journals which

are: International Journal on Software and Sys-

tems Modeling (SoSyM) and Journal of Software

and Systems (JSS).

2.3 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

The studies that were taken into consideration were

papers that present approaches for combining Agile

methods and MDD for software development. More-

over, only peer-reviewed papers published after 2001

and written in English are included. When a publi-

cation has multiple versions, only the recent one was

included. The following type of publications were ex-

cluded: short papers with less than 4 pages, papers

proposing Agile methods without a focus on MDD,

papers proposing approaches for MDD without con-

sidering Agile methods, papers concerned with MDD

perspectives where models are only used for speci-

fying and designing the system without a link to au-

tomatic code generation, papers proposing theoreti-

cal studies without practical implementation, papers

proposing partial Agile MDD approach, i.e. Agile

MDD should be applied for the full development life

cycle (starting from requirements all the way down to

testing), and papers combining Agile and MDD with

other approaches (e.g. Agile, MDD, and user-centred

design).

2.4 Data Extraction

The data extraction form was designed to ensure that

sufﬁcient data is extracted and collected to address the

research questions. It has been checked by the ﬁrst

and second authors to ensure its validity. Here, we

describe the key aspects of Agile MDD that we are

concerned with:

• The Characteristics of Agile MDD Ap-

proaches: in this context, we are concerned with

the main features of the approaches such as: (i)

the aim of Agile MDD approach: in this aspect,

we want to understand the different aims and

reasons behind combining Agile and MDD. (ii)

the application domain: the approaches are clas-

siﬁed according to the target application domain

for Agile MDD. (iii) methodology type: there

are different ways to combine Agile methods

and MDD techniques. Matinnejad (Matinnejad,

2011) has classiﬁed these as: Agile-based ap-

proach where MDD process is introduced into

a current Agile software project, MDD-based

approach where Agile methods are applied to

an existing MDD process, and Assembly-based

approach which has some elements from Agile

methods and others from MDD process. (iv)

modelling approach: the models can be deﬁned

using different modelling languages ranging

from general purpose languages such as UML

to Speciﬁc Domain Language (SDL) such as

Matlab. (v) Agile practices: in this aspect, we

are interested in ﬁnding which Agile practices

have been employed in Agile MDD approach.

(vi) MDD practices: here, we are interested in

ﬁnding out which MDD practices have been

used in Agile MDD approach. (vii) Agile MDD

process: in this dimension, we are interested

with understanding how Agile and MDD have

been integrated. (viii) veriﬁcation and validation:

veriﬁcation is meant to check if a system meets

a set of pre-determinant speciﬁcations. This

can involve running a simulation for a part of

the system or performing special testing, while

validation is used to check if the system being

developed meets the customer’s requirements.

(ix) evaluation methods: here, we want to now

how the approach has been evaluated? This

includes: a case study, experiments, running an

example, ..etc.

• The Beneﬁts of Agile MDD Approaches: the

beneﬁts of combining Agile and MDD reported

MODELSWARD 2017 - 5th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development

452

Table 1: The general context of Agile MDD approaches.

Study ID Reference Aim Application domain Methodology type Based-upon

S1 (Zhang and Patel, 2011) Shorten delivery cycle time, improve quality Telecommunication MDD-based Scrum, XP, MDD

S2 (Guta et al., 2009) Apply MDD approach to small-sized projects Web applications Assembly-based Parallel Agile, MDD

S3 (Grigera et al., 2012) Involve customers, create high level designs Web applications MDD-based Scrum, mockup models

S4 (Eliasson et al., 2014) Shorten development cycle, get early feedback Mechatronic systems MDD-based General Agile process, MDE

S5 (Zhang, 2004) Enhance MDD for agility and quality Telecommunication MDD-based XP, MDD

S6 (Kirby Jr, 2006) Get early feedback Reactive systems MDD-based General Agile process, MDD

S7 (Naki

cenovi

c, 2012) Shorten development cycle Financial systems MDD-based Scrum, MDA

S8 (Kulkarni et al., 2011) Shorten development time Business systems MDD-based General Agile process, MDD

S9 (Basso et al., 2015) Involve customers, quick designs Web applications Agile-based Scrum, MDE

S10 (Lano et al., 2015) Improve agility in MDD Transformation MDD-based Scrum, MDD

S11 (Luna et al., 2009) Improve user involvement Web applications Agile-based TDD, MDD

S12 (Rivero et al., 2014) Improve user involvement Web applications Agile-based Scrum, MDD

S13 (Rivero et al., 2013) Improve requirements gathering and customer involvement Web applications Agile-based Scrum, MDD

S14 (C

aceres et al., 2004) Combine the advantages of Agile methods and MDD Web applications MDD-based XP, MDA

S15 (Krasteva et al., 2013) Improve the modernisation development process Web applications MDD-based Scrum, MDE

in the studies are highlighted and discussed.

• The Problems and Challenges of Agile MDD

Approaches: the problems and the limitations

observed in the current Agile MDD approaches

are identiﬁed.

2.5 Conducting the Review

To select the eligible studies, the search process has

been conducted in three phases. Firstly, 299 papers

were found after applying the search strings for the

digital sources as follows: 81 papers from IEEE, 95

papers from ACM, 44 papers from Science Direct,

and 79 papers from SpringerLink. Then, 58 papers

were selected based on the titles and abstract scan-

ning. Finally, the full text of the papers were reviewed

for further reﬁnement. After applying our inclusion

and exclusion criteria, ﬁfteen studies were included

as shown in Table 1. To make sure that we have not

missed any relevant study, the list of references of

the included studies were searched manually. More-

over, we performed a manual search on some journals

to complement the automated search without ﬁnding

any further relevant study.

3 RESULTS

In this section, we report the results of the SLR re-

search questions in regards to Agile MDD.

3.1 The Characteristics of the

Approaches

The Aim of Combining Agile and MDD: keeping

the customer involved and actively collaborated in the

development process was the most frequently stated

aim for adopting Agile MDD (5 of 15 cases). More-

over, accelerating development process was another

common aim for combining Agile and MDD. Other

aims for incorporating Agile and MDD included: ob-

taining early feedback, improving the quality of the

ﬁnal product, and creating quick design. Some char-

acteristics of Agile MDD are presented in Table 1.

Figure 1: Statistics of some Agile MDD aspects.

The Application Domain: the most common domain

for Agile MDD approaches was web applications (8

of 15 cases). Some other domains include: ﬁnancial

services, reactive systems, mechatronic systems and

telecommunication. The majority of approaches were

targeting a speciﬁc single domain, however, few stud-

ies explicitly mentioned that they can be applicable

more generally for small-medium size projects such

as S2 and S10 (Fig. 1a).

Methodology Type: we found that the majority of

the reviewed Agile MDD approaches were MDD-

based. That may be due to the fact that MDD can

be considered as a heavyweight process and devel-

opers tend to relax its recommendations and to make

it more lightweight by introducing agility to the pro-

cess. Consequently, we think that the motivation for

The Integration of Agile Development and Model Driven Development - A Systematic Literature Review

453

adopting Agile MDD is more relevant for MDD as

opposed to Agile-based. A few approaches follow the

Agile-based methodology whilst we found only one

approach that is Assembly-based (Fig. 1b).

Modelling Approaches: Most of the approaches (6

of 15) used UML to deﬁne models while two more

studies (S2 and S7) used XML format. On the other

hand, S3, S9, S11, S12 and S13 deﬁned their own

DSL models (Fig. 1c).

Agile Practices: in terms of Agile methods, the most

common method was Scrum (8 out of 15 cases). This

is not surprising, since the latest Agile survey (One,

2016) identiﬁed Scrum as the most widespread Ag-

ile process (58%). XP was also adopted in some ap-

proaches like in S1 , S5 and S14. On another hand,

S7 used Scrum throughout the whole project but when

approaching the end of the project, tasks became difﬁ-

cult and could not be planned in sprints, and develop-

ers switched to Kanban. However, some Agile MDD

approaches did not specify which Agile methods they

used. In terms of Agile practices, most, if not all, Ag-

ile MDD approaches have followed an iterative and

incremental development. Moreover, Test-Driven De-

velopment, refactoring, prioritised backlogs and di-

rect customer involvement were the most frequently

used. Frequencies of these practices and occurrences

in reviewed studies are summarised in Table 2.

MDD Practices: most the approaches support the

development of systems by automatically generating

code (model-to-text transformation). However, only

few studies explicitly mentioned they support model-

to-model transformations without specifying how the

transformations have been implemented such as S3,

S4, S9 and S14. In terms of reverse engineering, the

majority of approaches provide only one-way forward

engineering. Only S7 supports round-trip engineer-

ing to synchronise the divergence between code and

models. Executable models - which are models that

can be run- have been used by some approaches such

as S1,S4,S5, and S6. Frequencies of these practices

and occurrences in reviewed studies are summarised

in Table 3.

The Process of Agile MDD: most of the approaches

failed to deﬁne a systematic process for combining

Agile and MDD except mentioning that some Agile

and MDD practices were used. The most comprehen-

sive approach is presented in S1. S1 used the System

Level Agile process (SLAP) which is a Scrum-based

process adopted by Motorola. Its development life

cycle is divided into three successive iterations, each

of which consists of application requirements and ar-

chitecture, development, and system integration fea-

ture testing. To achieve their Agile MDD approaches,

MDD activities (requirements, requirements analysis

and high-level design, detailed design, code genera-

tion, and system testing) are mapped into these three

iterations to build a new increment of the system.

From another perspective, Kulkarni et al. in S8 ar-

gue that Agile methodology is not suitable as is with

MDD as they found some activities, which require

in-depth analysis and detailed documentation, cannot

be conducted within short time-boxed iterations. For

this reason, they proposed to introduce meta-sprints to

be executed in parallel with the normal sprints where

sprints are used for understood functionalities while

meta-sprints are dedicated to features that require de-

tailed investigation such as evaluation.

Another interesting approach is proposed in S7. In

order to reduce the effort of model management,

platform-independent models (PIM) and platform-

speciﬁc models (PSM) are combined into a single

model which contains all information for all program-

ming languages.

Veriﬁcation and Validation Techniques: through

surveying the studies, veriﬁcation procedures in-

volved performing tests or running a simulation. For

instance, S2, S7, and S8 used integration testing while

S3, S9, S12, S13, and S15 used acceptance testing.

Both S3 and S11 used interaction testing to check in-

teractions between dynamic pages whilst S10 and S14

used unit testing. Moreover, simulation is used in S1,

S4, and S5 to verify the system earlier. However, ex-

plicit veriﬁcation was omitted in S6.

Evaluation Methods: in terms of methods used to

evaluate the Agile MDD approaches, most of the stud-

ies described an industrial case study (8 out of 15) or

academic case study such as S10 and S14 to evalu-

ate their approaches. Few studies presented a run-

ning example to illustrate their approaches such as

S11 and S13 while another two studies (S3 and S12)

conducted an experiment to provide the proof of con-

cept of their approaches (Fig. 1d).

3.2 The Beneﬁts

The approaches of Agile MDD reported the beneﬁts

of combining the two approaches in different aspects.

With respect to productivity, S1 noticed threefold in-

crease and 93% of code was generated automatically,

whereas S5 reported ﬁve times productivity improve-

ment in terms of number of lines of code per staff.

Similarity, S8 observed an improvement in productiv-

ity due to continuous focus on the deliverables and

shorter turnaround time (four weeks as compared to

six months in traditional approach). In regard of qual-

ity, S1 observed signiﬁcant improved quality of code

compared to hand-craft one. Likewise, S5 reported a

20% improvement in quality by simulation in terms

MODELSWARD 2017 - 5th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development

454

Table 2: Agile practices used in reviewed Agile MDD approaches.

Agile practice freq. Studies that reported the practice

Test-driven development 5 S1, S3, S5, S7, S11

Pair development 5 S1, S3, S7, S14, S15

Continuous integration 5 S1, S2, S7, S14, S15

Refactoring 5 S3, S10, S11, S13, S15

Prioritised backlog 5 S4, S8, S9, S13, S15

Direct customer involvement 5 S10, S11, S13, S12, S14

Stand-up meeting 4 S1, S4, S5, S8

Collective ownership 2 S7, S15

Self-selected team 1 S7

Burn-down chart 1 S8

Release planning 1 S14

Table 3: MDD practices used in reviewed Agile MDD approaches.

MDD practice freq. Studies that reported the practice

Automated code generation

(Model-to-text transformation)

S1, S2, S3, S4, S5,S6,S7,S8,S9, S10,

S11, S12, S13

UML modelling 7 S1, S5, S6, S9, S10, S14, S15

DSL modelling 6 S3, S4, S9, S11,S12,S13

Executable models 4 S1,S4,S5,S6

Model-to-model transformation 4 S3,S4,S9, S14

XML modelling 2 S2, S7

Model-based testing 1 S3

round-trip engineering 1 S7

of number of defects that escaped from testing. In

another respect, S3 found an improvement in terms

of time and customers satisfaction while S9 found

an improvement in code modularisation and simpler

mockup design.

From Agile development perspectives, S7 stated

that Agile practices make the starting curve shorter.

They also help to relax some recommendations of

MDD and ease its adoption by allowing developers

to spend a little time on small increments of func-

tionality. Furthermore, it has been noticed that the

development of Agile MDD is accelerated by us-

ing Test-Driven Development technique. Early feed-

back through frequent increments resulted in reduc-

tion in rework effort and better team commitment

in S8. Likewise, S4 stated that it helps to gain an

early knowledge and reduce the assumptions devel-

opers have to make. Moreover, in S13, requirements

gathering was improved by facilitating user involve-

ment in the development process. S14 found that pair

development practice was helpful in terms of increas-

ing team responsibility and commitment.

Compared to a traditional model-driven approach,

S12 noticed reduction in the errors and effort during

modelling stage while an increase in reusing prede-

ﬁned architecture. S14 found that the principle of as-

pects separation from MDD was helpful in facilitating

requirements gathering and analysis and planning the

user stories during iterations.

On the other hand, some studies such as S2, S6,

S10, S11 and S15 found the experiences of adopt-

ing Agile MDD successful without showing what and

how it was successful.

3.3 The Problems and Challenges

From all studies, we identiﬁed some problems that

occur when combining Agile and MDD approaches.

The ﬁrst problem is a steep learning curve as reported

in S1, S5, and S9. This arise due to the lack of ex-

perience, process, or culture. Zhang and Patel in S1

discuss that Agile MDD is relatively new and due to

the sharp learning curve, it is less likely to produce

beneﬁts in the short-term. However, there are long-

term beneﬁts for large projects with multiple releases.

Since models are created and transformed at dif-

ferent levels of abstractions with multiple views, in-

sufﬁcient management of models is another problem,

which is expected since it is a main issue in MDD

processes (France and Rumpe, 2007). Different stud-

ies report difﬁculties in keeping track of the rela-

tionship between requirements and models which im-

The Integration of Agile Development and Model Driven Development - A Systematic Literature Review

455

pedes responding to changes incrementally such in

S3, models merging such in S5, and models migra-

tion to new meta-models upon change request such as

in S8. Kulkarni et al. in S8 reported that the lack of

conﬁguration management of different parallel teams

is a problem that needs to be addressed. Also, the lack

of automation in testing made sprint durations longer.

They argue that purely Agile methods are not compat-

ible with MDD as they suggest using Agile methods

in limited scope; i.e. mature development teams and

projects less critical requirements. In the same con-

text they conclude that “we argue that true agility in

model-driven development is possible only when code

generators can also be adapted as quickly as applica-

tion models”.

4 SYNTHESIS

In this section, collected data is synthesised and the

research questions are answered.

RQ1: What are the main characteristics of current

Agile MDD approaches?

Due to the low number of the primary studies, it was

difﬁcult to provide a comparative analysis. Instead

we provide a general insights into the main charac-

teristics of Agile MDD approaches. We found that

publications have different strategies of adopting Ag-

ile MDD, motivations, and application domains, al-

though introducing Agile methods into MDD was

common to achieving Agile MDD. Although general-

isation is difﬁcult here, we found that approaches used

in the same domain have a similar context in terms of

their aims and practice, eg., as in S3, S12 and S13.

In order to make an efﬁcient and effective assessment

of the area, more case studies, industrial reports, and

experiments are needed.

RQ2: What are the beneﬁts of adopting Agile

MDD for the software development process?

When it comes to the beneﬁts, many Agile MDD ap-

proaches reported different positive impacts of incor-

porating Agile and MDD such as improvement in pro-

ductivity and quality, faster development rate and bet-

ter customer satisfaction. Furthermore, Agile MDD

has not been used only to develop a system from

scratch but also it has been used successfully for the

evolution of legacy systems as discussed in S7 and

S15. Nakicenovic in S7 states that “Through our in-

dustrial report we are able to provide strong support

in favour of the claim that MDD and Agile practices

can be used together, preserving the beneﬁts of each”

and “an Agile MDD could be a key success factor for

organizations, which are not ready for the introduc-

tion of the full-scale MDA”.

In spite of the fact that most of the approaches

had a successful experience in adopting Agile MDD,

they failed to show what has succeeded and how. This

makes understanding and comparing the results quite

difﬁcult. Moreover, it is unclear what kind of im-

provements MDD bring to Agile and vice versa.

RQ3: What are the problems and challenges of

adopting Agile MDD?

From all studies, only few discuss the limitations and

problems they face in Agile and MDD integration.

Unfortunately, it has been observed in a lot of pub-

lications that success projects are reported more than

failure. This review revealed that the most often re-

ported problems are: lack of model management, lack

of veriﬁcation, and steep learning curve and start-up

overheads. To address the model management prob-

lem, S7 proposed to minimise the number of mod-

els and hence the management effort by combining

combining PIM and PSM into a single model. Also,

it is important to deﬁne a systematic guidelines on

the integration of Agile development and MDD that

can help cutting steep learning curve. To evaluate the

approaches precisely, we urge researchers and practi-

tioners to report both failure and success projects.

5 RELATED WORK

To the best of our knowledge, there is only one re-

lated survey (Matinnejad, 2011) and one SLR (Bur-

den et al., 2014) in this area. In (Matinnejad, 2011),

the author proposes a criteria-based evaluation frame-

work to review and compare four Agile MDD ap-

proaches. Based on the results, he presented an empir-

ical analysis. Although this is the ﬁrst work that rep-

resents a signiﬁcant attempt to examine Agile MDD

approaches, it is limited to a narrow scope and it is

not a systematic review. In (Burden et al., 2014), the

authors conduct a SLR for the experiences of Agile

MDD approaches from an empirical point of view.

They propose two research questions to understand

the state-of-art of Agile MDD and to investigate what

is lacking in the literature. Seven publications are

reviewed in this study. They conclude that the area

in Agile MDD is still immature and there is a need

for more reports on industrial experience of Agile

MDD. The drawback of this work is that the quality

assessment criteria for selecting the publications are

too speciﬁc (e.g. details of development team must

be presented). As a consequence, many well-known

publications are missing such as (Naki

cenovi

c, 2012)

and (Luna et al., 2009). Also, they are concerned

with investigating the state-of-art of Agile MDD in

general. In this study, we reviewed more studies and

MODELSWARD 2017 - 5th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development

456

investigated different aspects of Agile MDD such as

the main characteristics of current Agile MDD ap-

proaches, the beneﬁts, and challenges of Agile and

MDD integration.

6 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE

WORK

In this paper, we have presented details of SLR on Ag-

ile and MDD integration. This study included a total

of 15 papers that were published from the year 2001

till 2016. The main characteristics of Agile MDD

were explored and the observed beneﬁts and problems

were identiﬁed. The results show that there is still a

lot of confusion about what Agile MDD is and how

the two approaches can be effectively integrated and

what the real beneﬁts and challenges are. This proves

that Agile MDD is still in its early stages. This SLR

should contribute in advancing the state of research of

Agile MDD and can be used by researchers to bridge

the gap in this area, while industrial practitioners can

utilise the description of Agile MDD approaches and

corresponding practices to identify both the success

factors and potential challenges of the integration of

Agile and MDD. One of the initial conclusions we

came up is that many studies failed to explain how

Agile and MDD have been combined. Moreover,

methodological aspects have been only discussed by

few studies. Most approaches present illustrative ex-

amples but lack comparative in-depth evaluation of

the effectiveness of the approaches. As suggested by

(Burden et al., 2014), more experience reports and

evaluations are required to advance the area of Agile

MDD. As future work, we will conduct an interview-

based study to examine current practices for Agile

methods and MDD in order to verify and complement

the ﬁndings of the SLR.

REFERENCES

Basso, F. P., Pillat, R. M., Roos-Frantz, F., and Frantz,

R. Z. (2015). Combining mde and scrum on the rapid

prototyping of web information systems. Interna-

tional Journal of Web Engineering and Technology,

10(3):214–244.

Beck, K. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development.

Beck, K. and Fowler, M. (2001). Planning Extreme Pro-

gramming. The XP series. Addison-Wesley.

Burden, H., Hansson, S., and Zhao, Y. (2014). How MAD

are we? Empirical Evidence for Model-driven Agile

Development. In Proceedings of XM 2014, 3rd Ex-

treme Modeling Workshop, volume 1239, pages 2–11,

Valencia, Spain. CEUR.

aceres, P., D

ıaz, F., and Marcos, E. (2004). Integrating an

agile process in a model driven architecture. Citeseer.

Cockburn, A. (2002). Agile Software Development. Agile

Software Development. Addison-Wesley.

Eliasson, U., Heldal, R., Lantz, J., and Berger, C.

(2014). Agile model-driven engineering in mecha-

tronic systems-an industrial case study. In Model-

Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, pages

433–449. Springer.

Fowler, M. (2005). The new methodology.

France, R. and Rumpe, B. (2007). Model-driven develop-

ment of complex software: A research roadmap. In

2007 Future of Software Engineering, pages 37–54.

IEEE Computer Society.

Frankel, D. S. (2003). Model Driven Architecture: Apply-

ing MDA to Enterprise Computing, volume 25. John

Wiley & Sons.

Grigera, J., Rivero, J. M., Luna, E. R., Giacosa, F., and

Rossi, G. (2012). From requirements to web appli-

cations in an agile model-driven approach. In Web

Engineering, pages 200–214. Springer.

Guta, G., Schreiner, W., and Draheim, D. (2009). A

lightweight mdsd process applied in small projects.

In Software Engineering and Advanced Applications,

2009. SEAA’09. 35th Euromicro Conference on, pages

255–258. IEEE.

Kirby Jr, J. (2006). Model-driven agile development of re-

active multi-agent systems. Technical report, DTIC

Document.

Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for performing sys-

tematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele University,

33(2004):1–26.

Kleppe, A., Warmer, J., and Bast, W. (2003). MDA Ex-

plained: The Model Driven Architecture : Practice

and Promise. The Addison-Wesley object technology

series. Addison-Wesley.

Krasteva, I., Stavros, S., and Ilieva, S. (2013). Agile model-

driven modernization to the service cloud. In The

Eighth International Conference on Internet and Web

Applications and Services (ICIW 2013). Rome, Italy.

Kulkarni, V., Barat, S., and Ramteerthkar, U. (2011). Early

experience with agile methodology in a model-driven

approach. In Model Driven Engineering Languages

and Systems, pages 578–590. Springer.

Lano, K., Alfraihi, H., Yassipour Tehrani, S., and Haughton,

H. (2015). Improving the application of agile model-

based development: Experiences from case stud-

ies. In The Tenth International Conference on Soft-

ware Engineering Advances, pages 213–219. Interna-

tional Academy, Research, and Industry Association (

IARIA ).

Luna, E. R., Grigera, J., and Rossi, G. (2009). Bridging test

and model-driven approaches in web engineering. In

International Conference on Web Engineering, pages

136–150. Springer.

Matinnejad, R. (2011). Agile model driven development:

An intelligent compromise. In Software Engineer-

ing Research, Management and Applications (SERA),

2011 9th International Conference on, pages 197–

202. IEEE.

The Integration of Agile Development and Model Driven Development - A Systematic Literature Review

457

Mohagheghi, P. and Dehlen, V. (2008). Where is the

proof?-a review of experiences from applying mde

in industry. In European Conference on Model

Driven Architecture-Foundations and Applications,

pages 432–443. Springer.

Naki

cenovi

c, M. B. (2012). An agile driven architecture

modernization to a model-driven development solu-

tion. International Journal on Advances in Software

Volume 5, Number 3 & 4, 2012.

One, V. (2016). 10th annual state of agile development re-

port.

Rivero, J. M., Grigera, J., Rossi, G., Luna, E. R., Montero,

F., and Gaedke, M. (2014). Mockup-driven develop-

ment: providing agile support for model-driven web

engineering. Information and Software Technology,

56(6):670–687.

Rivero, J. M., Luna, E. R., Grigera, J., and Rossi, G.

(2013). Improving user involvement through a model-

driven requirements approach. In Model-Driven

Requirements Engineering (MoDRE), 2013 Interna-

tional Workshop on, pages 20–29. IEEE.

Schwaber, K. and Beedle, M. (2002). Agile Software De-

velopment with Scrum. Agile Software Development.

Prentice Hall.

Selic, B. (2003). The pragmatics of model-driven develop-

ment. IEEE software, 20(5):19–25.

Vijayasarathy, L. and Turk, D. (2008). Agile software de-

velopment: A survey of early adopters. Journal of

Information Technology Management, 19(2):1–8.

Zhang, Y. (2004). Test-driven modeling for model-driven

development. Software, IEEE, 21(5):80–86.

Zhang, Y. and Patel, S. (2011). Agile model-driven devel-

opment in practice. IEEE software, 28(2):84.

MODELSWARD 2017 - 5th International Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development

458