Some Representative Viewpoints on AgileMethods from ICSE '2002For related activities on AgileMethods at ICSE '2002, see: AgileMethodsAtIcseTwoThousandTwo.
During the various discussions, several maps were suggested to compare the different processes and process frameworks in terms of their support of agility.
PhilippeKruchten suggested the following taxonomy along two dimensions:
Philippe characterized the RationalUnifiedProcess as a process framework that can be instantiated in light or heavyweight forms and CMM/CMMI as a framework for evaluating processes:
BarryBoehm located the different development paradigms on a one-dimensional map according to their emphasis on upfront planning. He placed ExtremeProgramming close to the left end of the spectrum, but did not characterize it as hacking:
JyrkiKontio during the IcseWorkshopOnIterativeAdaptiveAndAgileProcesses? drew the following diagram. He suggested that the right development paradigm depends on two orthogonal project attributes: required agility and system complexity/size:
He argued that agile methods have inherent strengts in the lower right corner, but become less effective as size and complexity increases. However, that's where the money is made and systems with big impact are built, i.e., scaling up of agile methods is a central business challenge.
Edit this page at will if you think that your viewpoints have been misrepresented. Or contact HakanErdogmus with suggested changes.