IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v6y2020i1d10.1057_s41599-019-0384-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncovering the failure of Agile framework implementation using SSM-based action research

Author

Listed:
  • Kevin Suryaatmaja

    (Institut Teknologi Bandung
    Bina Nusantara University)

  • Dermawan Wibisono

    (Institut Teknologi Bandung
    Universitas Pertamina)

  • Achmad Ghazali

    (Institut Teknologi Bandung)

  • Rachma Fitriati

    (Universitas Indonesia)

Abstract

It is undeniable that the Agile software development (SD) framework has been commonly used in information technology projects. However, many of the early adopters failed to implement it properly. Some researchers had proposed a solution by using the adaptation framework as a support, but they cannot clearly explain its development. Furthermore, the correlation between adaptation framework and problem solving is dubious. This study reviews and discusses the literature and empirical studies on the failure of Agile SD implementation by revisiting the supporting framework that used to comprehend the issues in Agile SD implementation. A comparative approach is used to review the literature available in academic databases, such as ProQuest, EBSCO, IEEE, and Scopus, to ensure research originality and novelty. By filtering 87 papers that met the initial criteria, only 4 researchers focused on the area of knowledge management and used the learning process as a supporting framework in Agile SD implementation. However, they did not clearly explain the development of the framework for Agile SD. The author’s initial research on a corporation reveals the failure of Agile SD implementation. Soft systems methodology (SSM)-based action research (AR) proposed to identify the real issues in Agile SD implementation. SSM-based AR provides a solution by clarifying the development of a framework using tacit and explicit knowledge to validate the development process. This study can help practitioners and academics understand the process of Agile SD implementation by early adopters who still need assistance with its application. This study is the first to explore Agile SD implementation in a corporation using the experience-based approach, contributing to knowledge improvement. It contributes to the scholarly literature by presenting concepts that combine human-centric aspects and knowledge management to improve the learning in the organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Kevin Suryaatmaja & Dermawan Wibisono & Achmad Ghazali & Rachma Fitriati, 2020. "Uncovering the failure of Agile framework implementation using SSM-based action research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:6:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0384-9
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-019-0384-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-019-0384-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-019-0384-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Shrivastava, 1983. "A Typology Of Organizational Learning Systems," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 7-28, January.
    2. Brix, Jacob, 2017. "Exploring knowledge creation processes as a source of organizational learning: A longitudinal case study of a public innovation project," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 113-127.
    3. Daniel Turk & France. Robert & Bernhard Rumpe, 2005. "Assumptions Underlying Agile Software-Development Processes," Journal of Database Management (JDM), IGI Global, vol. 16(4), pages 62-87, October.
    4. Chris Kimble, 2013. "Knowledge management, codification and tacit knowledge," Post-Print halshs-00826911, HAL.
    5. Bierly, Paul E. & Hämäläinen, Timo, 1995. "Organizational learning and strategy," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 209-224, September.
    6. Richard Vidgen & Xiaofeng Wang, 2009. "Coevolving Systems and the Organization of Agile Software Development," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(3), pages 355-376, September.
    7. Kimiz Dalkir, 2011. "Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262015080, December.
    8. Payam Hanafizadeh & Fakhrossadat Ghamkhari, 2019. "Elicitation of Tacit Knowledge Using Soft Systems Methodology," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 521-555, October.
    9. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Budiarso & Utomo Sarjono Putro & Yos Sunitiyoso & Rachma Fitriati, 2022. "Constructing the collaborative Working Relationships in one of the Big Four Firms," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 679-709, October.
    2. Michaela Pöhlmann & Carlos de las Heras-Pedrosa & Jürgen Seitz & Carmen Jambrino-Maldonado, 2025. "Evaluating the potential of agile branding: opportunities and challenges in the start-up context," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. de Vasconcelos, José Braga & Kimble, Chris & Carreteiro, Paulo & Rocha, Álvaro, 2017. "The application of knowledge management to software evolution," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1499-1506.
    2. Wink, Ruediger, 2002. "The transregional dimension of territorial knowledge management. An evolutionary perspective on the role of universities," ERSA conference papers ersa02p496, European Regional Science Association.
    3. Nancy Beauregard & Louise Lemyre & Jacques Barrette, 2015. "The Domains of Organizational Learning Practices: An Agency-Structure Perspective," Societies, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-21, October.
    4. Agulles, Remei & Prats, Mª Julia, 2011. "Learning in practice: What organizational and management literature can contribute to professional and occupational development," IESE Research Papers D/938, IESE Business School.
    5. Janowicz-Panjaitan, Martyna & Noorderhaven, Niels G., 2008. "Formal and informal interorganizational learning within strategic alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1337-1355, September.
    6. Eduard Gabriel Ceptureanu & Sebastian Ion Ceptureanu & Doina I. Popescu & Liviu Bogdan Vlad, 2017. "Two Stage Analysis of Successful Change Implementation of Knowledge Management Strategies in Energy Companies from Romania," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, November.
    7. Steiner, Michael & Hartmann, Christian, 2002. "Material and immaterial dimensions of clusters. Cooperation and learning as infrastructure for innovation," ERSA conference papers ersa02p508, European Regional Science Association.
    8. Melissa A. Schilling & Patricia Vidal & Robert E. Ployhart & Alexandre Marangoni, 2003. "Learning by Doing Something Else: Variation, Relatedness, and the Learning Curve," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(1), pages 39-56, January.
    9. Jerez-Gomez, Pilar & Cespedes-Lorente, Jose & Valle-Cabrera, Ramon, 2005. "Organizational learning capability: a proposal of measurement," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 58(6), pages 715-725, June.
    10. M. Max Evans & Ilja Frissen & Anthony K. P. Wensley, 2018. "Organisational Information and Knowledge Sharing: Uncovering Mediating Effects of Perceived Trustworthiness Using the PROCESS Approach," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-29, March.
    11. Duniesky Feitó Madrigal & Alejandro Mungaray Lagarda & Michelle Texis Flores, 2016. "Factors associated with learning management in Mexican micro-entrepreneurs," Estudios Gerenciales, Universidad Icesi, vol. 32(141), pages 381-386, December.
    12. Nachiketa Tripathi & Sonia Nongmaithem, 2007. "Differences in Organizational Learning Processes: A Study of Two Organizations," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 32(3), pages 301-320, August.
    13. Christian Sillaber & Bernhard Waltl & Horst Treiblmaier & Ulrich Gallersdörfer & Michael Felderer, 2021. "Laying the foundation for smart contract development: an integrated engineering process model," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 863-882, September.
    14. Ankita Tandon & Unnikrishnan K. Nair, 2015. "Enactment of knowledge brokering: Agents, roles, processes and the impact of immersion," Working papers 183, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.
    15. Emmanuelle Vaast & Geoff Walsham, 2009. "Trans-Situated Learning: Supporting a Network of Practice with an Information Infrastructure," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 547-564, December.
    16. Alvesson, Mats & Sveningsson, Stefan, 2011. "Management is the solution: Now what was the problem? On the fragile basis for managerialism," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 349-361.
    17. Dupouet, Olivier & Yildizoglu, Murat, 2006. "Organizational performance in hierarchies and communities of practice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 668-690, December.
    18. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    19. Gayoung Kim & Woo Jin Lee, 2021. "The Venture Firm’s Ambidexterity: Do Transformational Leaders Boost Organizational Learning for Venture Growth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-15, July.
    20. Frédéric CREPLET, 2004. "Les Portails d’entreprise : une réponse aux dimensions de l’entreprise « processeur de connaissances »," Working Papers of BETA 2004-07, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:6:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-019-0384-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.