Over the years, a substantial body of knowledge of software process improvement (SPI) was accumulated that, among other things, includes numerous success factors that companies should consider when conducting improvement activities. The number of success factors is large and quite often, multiple success factors with similar names and descriptions are available to address a specific phenomenon. This raises the question whether all the success factors are unique and, if not, which ones are actually the same. In this paper, we aim to structure the body of knowledge on success factors in SPI. We conducted a systematic literature review on 103 publications that mention 1.320 success factors. A multi-staged manual and AI-supported analysis reduced the number of success factors to 124, which we categorize into 42 general success factor classes. For 20 of these general success factor classes, we observed a stable number of publications over a period of almost 30 years that, however, show only few success factors constantly studied and re-discovered. A high number of synonyms shows that this area of SPI needs consolidation for which we lay the foundation by providing a big picture and identifying the most relevant success factors as a starting point.

Together with many success stories, promises such as the increase in production speed and the improvement in stakeholders’ collaboration have contributed to making agile a transformation in the software industry in which many companies want to take part. However, driven either by a natural and expected evolution or by contextual factors that challenge the adoption of agile methods as prescribed by their creator(s), software processes in practice mutate into hybrids over time. Are these still agile? In this article, we investigate the question: what makes a software development method agile? We present an empirical study grounded in a large-scale international survey that aims to identify software development methods and practices that improve or tame agility. Based on 556 data points, we analyze the perceived degree of agility in the implementation of standard project disciplines and its relation to used development methods and practices. Our findings suggest that only a small number of participants operate their projects in a purely traditional or agile manner (under 15 percent). That said, most project disciplines and most practices show a clear trend towards increasing degrees of agility. Compared to the methods used to develop software, the selection of practices has a stronger effect on the degree of agility of a given discipline. Finally, there are no methods or practices that explicitly guarantee or prevent agility. We conclude that agility cannot be defined solely at the process level. Additional factors need to be taken into account when trying to implement or improve agility in a software company. Finally, we discuss the field of software process-related research in the light of our findings and present a roadmap for future research.

Abstract Hardly any software development process is used as prescribed by authors or standards. Regardless of company size or industry sector, a majority of project teams and companies use hybrid development methods (short: hybrid methods) that combine different development methods and practices. Even though such hybrid methods are highly individualized, a common understanding of how to systematically construct synergetic practices is missing. In this article, we make a first step towards a statistical construction procedure for hybrid methods. Grounded in 1467 data points from a large‐scale practitioner survey, we study the question: What are hybrid methods made of and how can they be systematically constructed? Our findings show that only eight methods and few practices build the core of modern software development. Using an 85% agreement level in the participants' selections, we provide examples illustrating how hybrid methods can be characterized by the practices they are made of. Furthermore, using this characterization, we develop an initial construction procedure, which allows for defining a method frame and enriching it incrementally to devise a hybrid method using ranked sets of practice.

Among the multitude of software development processes available, hardly any is used by the book. Regardless of company size or industry sector, a majority of project teams and companies use customized processes that combine different development methods--so-called hybrid development methods. Even though such hybrid development methods are highly individualized, a common understanding of how to systematically construct synergetic practices is missing. In this paper, we make a first step towards devising such guidelines. Grounded in 1,467 data points from a large-scale online survey among practitioners, we study the current state of practice in process use to answer the question: What are hybrid development methods made of? Our findings reveal that only eight methods and few practices build the core of modern software development. This small set allows for statistically constructing hybrid development methods. Using an 85% agreement level in the participants' selections, we provide two examples illustrating how hybrid development methods are characterized by the practices they are made of. Our evidence-based analysis approach lays the foundation for devising hybrid development methods.

Abstract The emergence of agile methods and practices has not only changed the development processes but might also have affected how companies conduct software process improvement (SPI). Through a set of complementary studies, we aim to understand how SPI has changed in times of agile software development. Specifically, we aim (a) to identify and characterize the set of publications that connect elements of agility to SPI, (b) to explore to which extent agile methods/practices have been used in the context of SPI, and (c) to understand whether the topics addressed in the literature are relevant and useful for industry professionals. To study these questions, we conducted an in‐depth analysis of the literature identified in a previous mapping study, an interview study, and an analysis of the responses given by industry professionals to SPI‐related questions stemming from an independently conducted survey study. Regarding the first question, we identified 55 publications that focus on both SPI and agility of which 48 present and discuss how agile methods/practices are used to steer SPI initiatives. Regarding the second question, we found that the two most frequently mentioned agile methods in the context of SPI are Scrum and Extreme Programming (XP), while the most frequently mentioned agile practices are integrate often, test‐first, daily meeting, pair programming, retrospective, on‐site customer, and product backlog. Regarding the third question, we found that a majority of the interviewed and surveyed industry professionals see SPI as a continuous activity. They agree with the agile SPI literature that agile methods/practices play an important role in SPI activities but that the importance given to specific agile methods/practices does not always coincide with the frequency with which these methods/practices are mentioned in the literature.

Hybrid approaches for software and system development have become reality. Recent research shows the use of hybrid development approaches mainly grounded in experience and driven by pragmatism. At the same time, a vast number of success factors is known that influences process development and process use alike. However, even though industrial practice shows a need for hybrid development approaches and knowledge regarding the success factors is in place, a systematic approach to develop, deploy and tailor hybrid development approaches is missing. This paper reports on ongoing research that aims at developing a method to support the evidence-driven construction of hybrid development approaches. We provide an overview of the required method components and outline how hybrid development approaches can be deployed at the organizational level and tailored at the project level. We further give an overview of ongoing and completed studies supporting the method's construction and evaluation.

Today, establishing agile methods and an agile organisational culture in parallel is a commonly accepted prerequisite for the success of agile in organisations. Latest research show a correlation between agile methods and agile culture. Less discussed in Software Engineering is how the realisation of agile methods affects the development of an agile culture.