Abstract Large-scale systems development commonly faces the challenge of managing relevant knowledge between different organizational groups, particularly in increasingly agile contexts. Here, there is a conflict between coordination and group autonomy, and it is challenging to determine what necessary coordination information must be shared by what teams or groups, and what can be left to local team management. We introduce a way to manage this complexity using a modeling framework based on two core concepts: methodological islands (i.e., groups using different development methods than the surrounding organization) and boundary objects (i.e., artifacts that create a common understanding across team borders). However, we found that companies often lack a systematic way of assessing coordination issues and the use of boundary objects between methodological islands. As part of an iterative design science study, we have addressed this gap by producing a modeling framework (BOMI: Boundary Objects and Methodological Islands) to better capture and analyze coordination and knowledge management in practice. This framework includes a metamodel, as well as a list of bad smells over this metamodel that can be leveraged to detect inter-team coordination issues. The framework also includes a methodology to suggest concrete modeling steps and broader guidelines to help apply the approach successfully in practice. We have developed Eclipse-based tool support for the BOMI method, allowing for both graphical and textual model creation, and including an implementation of views over BOMI instance models in order to manage model complexity. We have evaluated these artifacts iteratively together with five large-scale companies developing complex systems. In this work, we describe the BOMI framework and its iterative evaluation in several real cases, reporting on lessons learned and identifying future work. We have produced a matured and stable modeling framework which facilitates understanding and reflection over complex organizational configurations, communication, governance, and coordination of knowledge artifacts in large-scale agile system development.

Agile methods have become mainstream even in large-scale systems engineering companies that need to accommodate different development cycles of hardware and software. For such companies, requirements engineering is an essential activity that involves upfront and detailed analysis which can be at odds with agile development methods. This paper presents a multiple case study with seven large-scale systems companies, reporting their challenges, together with best practices from industry. We also analyze literature about two popular large-scale agile frameworks, SAFe® and LeSS, to derive potential solutions for the challenges. Our results are based on 20 qualitative interviews, five focus groups, and eight cross-company workshops which we used to both collect and validate our results. We found 24 challenges which we grouped in six themes, then mapped to solutions from SAFe®, LeSS, and our companies, when available. In this way, we contribute a comprehensive overview of RE challenges in relation to large-scale agile system development, evaluate the degree to which they have been addressed, and outline research gaps. We expect these results to be useful for practitioners who are responsible for designing processes, methods, or tools for large scale agile development as well as guidance for researchers.

Driven by the need for faster time-to-market and reduced development lead-time, large-scale systems engineering companies are adopting agile methods in their organizations. This agile transformation is challenging and it is common that adoption starts bottom-up with agile software teams within the context of traditional company structures. This creates the challenge of agile teams working within a document-centric and plan-driven (or waterfall) environment. While it may be desirable to take the best of both worlds, it is not clear how that can be achieved especially with respect to managing requirements in large-scale systems. This paper presents an exploratory case study focusing on two departments of a large-scale systems engineering company (automotive) that is in the process of company-wide agile adoption. We present challenges that agile teams face while working within a larger plan-driven context and propose potential strategies to mitigate the challenges. Challenges relate to, e.g., development teams not being aware of the high-level requirements, difficulties to manage change of these requirements as well as their relationship to backlog items such as user stories. While we found strategies for solving most of the challenges, they remain abstract and empirical research on their effectiveness is currently lacking.

Large-scale system development companies are increasingly adopting agile methods. While this adoption may improve lead-times, such companies need to balance two trade-offs: (i) the need to have a uniform, consistent development method on system level with the need for specialised methods for teams in different disciplines (e.g., hardware, software, mechanics, sales, support); (ii) the need for comprehensive documentation on system level with the need to have lightweight documentation enabling iterative and agile work. With specialised methods for teams, isolated teams work within larger ecosystems of plan-driven culture, i.e., teams become agile "islands". At the boundaries, these teams share knowledge which needs to be managed well for a correct system to be developed. While it is useful to support diverse and specialised methods, it is important to understand which islands are repeatedly encountered, the reasons or factors triggering their existence, and how best to handle coordination between them. Based on a multiple case study, this work presents a catalogue of islands and the boundary objects between them. We believe this work will be beneficial to practitioners aiming to understand their ecosystems and researchers addressing communication and coordination challenges in large-scale development.

In the last decades, agile methods had a huge impact on how software is developed. In many cases, this has led to significant benefits, such as quality and speed of software deliveries to customers. However, safety-critical systems have widely been dismissed from benefiting from agile methods. Products that include safety critical aspects are therefore faced with a situation in which the development of safety-critical parts can significantly limit the potential speed-up through agile methods, for the full product, but also in the non-safety critical parts. For such products, the ability to develop safety-critical software in an agile way will generate a competitive advantage. In order to enable future research in this important area, we present in this paper a mapping of the current state of practice based on a mixed method approach. Starting from a workshop with experts from six large Swedish product development companies we develop a lens for our analysis. We then present a systematic mapping study on safety-critical systems and agile development through this lens in order to map potential benefits, challenges, and solution candidates for guiding future research.

T-Reqs is a text-based requirements management solution based on the git version control system. It combines useful conventions, templates and helper scripts with powerful existing solutions from the git ecosystem and provides a working solution to address some known requirements engineering challenges in large-scale agile system development. Specifically, it allows agile cross-functional teams to be aware of requirements at system level and enables them to efficiently propose updates to those requirements. Based on our experience with T-Reqs, we i) relate known requirements challenges of large-scale agile system development to tool support; ii) list key requirements for tooling in such a context; and iii) propose concrete solutions for challenges.

Motivated by their success in software development, companies implement agile methods and their practices increasingly for software-intense, large products, such as cars, telecommunication infrastructure, and embedded systems. Such systems are usually subject to safety and regulative concerns as well as different development cycles of hardware and software. Consequently, requirements engineering involves upfront and detailed analysis, which can be at odds with agile (software) development. In this paper, we present results from a multiple case study with two car manufacturers, a telecommunications company, and a technology company that are on the journey to introduce organization wide continuous integration and continuous delivery to customers. Based on 20 qualitative interviews, 5 focus groups, and 2 cross-company workshops, we discuss possible scopes of agile methods within system development, the consequences this has on the role of requirements, and the challenges that arise from the interplay of requirements engineering and agile methods in large-scale system development. These relate in particular to communicating and managing knowledge about a) customer value and b) the system under development. We conclude that better alignment of a holistic requirements model with agile development practices promises rich gains in development speed, flexibility, and overall quality of software and systems.