Agile Sponsors
Featured Whitepapers
- Learn Ways to Keep Schedules and Costs in Line With Requirements Change Management
- Java Deployments in an Enterprise Environment
- Challenges & Characteristics of Enterprise Continuous Integration
- Build Release Plans That Deliver Customer Value!
- Improving Traceability and Auditability Across the Development Lifecycle
|
Being a strong proponent of both Agile and Configuration Management (CM), I was curious to learn if Agile professionals perceived CM to be of value in an Agile setting. Having worked in both areas for some time, my initial hypothesis was "yes" Agile professionals value CM. It should be noted that the Agile Manifesto has a value that says "People and Interactions over Processes and Tools". I interpret this to mean that the people and their interactions should drive the appropriate level of processes and tools and not have tools or processes dictate how people should work and interactions should occur. In addition, the word "over" does not mean "versus" so it does not mean that processes and tools are unimportant.
While most Agile professionals do not let CM drive their interactions, they appear to value CM. Having worked in Agile teams and hearing stories from Agile and CM professionals, I decided to exercise my hypothesis and find out if in fact Agile professionals do find CM tools and processes to be of value in their software development work and at what level. With that in mind, I conducted two studies to determine the importance of CM. Study #1 - How Important are CM tools?
I provided five categories as possible answers: Extremely Important; Very Important; Somewhat Important; Not very Important; and Not Important at all. While not meant to be an exact survey, it certainly provided a telling outcome. The results from this study (based on 208 respondents) indicate that CM tools (or at least the version control function) are indeed important for Agile teams working in software development. When combining the number of respondents who answered either "Extremely Important" or "Very Important", the result was a dramatic 94%. This is quite an amazing number. Parsed out, this includes 75% of the respondents answering "Extremely Important" and 19% answering "Very Important". I wonder if there are any other tools where 75% of Agile professionals would answer as being extremely important to their work. Respondents who answered "Not Very Important" or "Not Important at all" accounted for only 2%. While there were over 200 people who responded, I do not consider this conclusive data. However, it is certainly data to "chew on". Table 1 illustrates the spread of answers across all 5 categories.
Table 1: Importance of CM tools (e.g., Version Control) for Agile projects Another interesting result from this survey is the distribution of those that answered "Extremely Important" appears to vary by age in a telling way. The chart below indicates that older Agile professionals find more importance in CM tools. About 67% of those in the 18-24 age category find CM tools extremely important. Of those in the 25-34 age category, 78% find CM tools extremely important. Of those in the 34-55 age category, 89% find CM tools extremely important. Most telling are those Agile professionals that are 55 years of age or older, 100% find CM tools extremely important. To be fair, there was a smaller sample of data for those 55+ years old, so further studies should occur to make this data more meaningful. However, it raises the question, as engineering professionals increase in age (and presumably in experience) do CM tools become more important? Have they experienced enough problems as a result of not having solid version control, where a CM tool is considered extremely important? Table 2 illustrates the age spread and importance of CM tools.
Table 2: Distribution by age range of who rated CM tools "Extremely Important" And finally the last bit of data from the survey results indicates that there may be a slight difference in the way the Agile engineers (e.g., as part of the Agile project team) perceive the importance of CM tools versus the way Product Managers do. In this case, 90% of the Agile professionals who are Engineers appear to indicate that CM tools are extremely important while only 60% of Agile professionals who are Product Managers indicate this. This may account for the fact that engineers are more severely impacted when there are problems with identifying or controlling code. However, upon further investigation, when combining the top two categories, 100% of both Engineers and Product Managers believe CM tools are either "Extremely Important" or "Very Important". Table 3 illustrates the distribution of importance by these two roles.
Table 3: Distribution of Importance by Role (e.g., Engineers and Product Managers) Study #2 - How Important are CM Functional Areas?
I provided 10 value choices (from 1 to 10) where 1 is the lowest value and 10 is the highest value. While not meant to be an exact survey, it provided some interesting data. The results from this study (based on a modest 25 respondents) indicate a range of perceived values for the various CM functions. Build Management received the overall highest average value score with 9.21 (out of 10). This is not surprising since continuous integration and build is a highly valued practice for those who implement Agile. This was closely followed by Version Control which received an average value score of 9.13. This may be because of the recognized need of control due to the high volume of code changes. The high value of the version control function correlates well with the first study where a high percentage of Agile professionals indicated that CM tools (e.g., version control) were either extremely important or very important. Branching and Merging is next with a score of 8.33. When considering that a big part of continuous integration assumes merging, then this high score is not surprising. Most interesting is Change Control with the fourth highest score of 7.92. In the survey, there was a short description included with Change Control that said "process of managing changes". With this additional piece of information, it may be that Agile professionals align control of changes with iteration planning where change is periodically managed. Not surprisingly, CM reporting and auditing are perceived as least valuable. Agile tends to find reporting beyond the basic burn-down charts of less value and believes that auditing is just an extra step that is unnecessary when the team works continuously and closely together. Table 4 illustrates the average values of the various CM functions. While I do not consider this conclusive data, it is certainly data to "chew on".
Table 4: Average value scores of the various CM functions. Conclusion About the Author
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Hits: 768 Comments (0)
|
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Agile Marketplace - Announcements and Special Offers
Webcast: Moving Build and Code Quality Upstream
This interactive panel discussion moderated by Bob Aiello, Editor-in-Chief fo the CM Journal brings industry experts Anders Wallgren, CTO of Electric Cloud and Gwyn Fisher, CTO of Klocwork together for a candid discussion of the cost savings, productivity and quality benefits that can be achieved by stabilizing builds and code quality as early in the development cycle as possible.
Register Now!
Collabnet -TeamForge 5.3
CollabNet TeamForge 5.3 includes Dynamic Planning—providing flexibility to model release scope and timeline in a single view. Now, you can easily manipulate/adjust release data.
Download Your Free Trial
Requirements-based testing (RBT) can help to ensure comprehensive test coverage, reducing the risk of failure and improving software quality. This white paper details how application lifecycle management can be used to more effectively implement RBT processes, offering greater collaboration, traceability and control.can help you increase efficiency, reduce project risk, and improve overall software quality. Learn how MKS Integrity for application lifecycle management enables RBT, delivering full lifecycle traceability to help ensure that project requirements have complete test planning and execution coverage.
Download the Requirements-Based Testing whitepaper
PureCM –SCM for Agile Teams
PureCM helps you to manage development in short iterations: keeping track of changes, supporting automated builds and preserving frequent snapshots of your projects.
Get the free trial now


Being a strong proponent of both Agile and Configuration Management (CM), I was curious to learn if Agile professionals perceived CM to be of value in an Agile setting. Having worked in both areas for some time, my initial hypothesis was "yes" Agile professionals value CM. It should be noted that the Agile Manifesto has a value that says "People and Interactions over Processes and Tools". I interpret this to mean that the people and their interactions should drive the appropriate level of processes and tools and not have tools or processes dictate how people should work and interactions should occur. In addition, the word "over" does not mean "versus" so it does not mean that processes and tools are unimportant.




