1.1 Context! Context! Context!
The fundamental challenge is that software development is complex and success depends on a large number of context factors. Dyba (T. Dybå, Dag IK Sjøberg, and Daniela S. Cruzes., 2012) pointed out the importance of context when it comes to empirical studies. Indeed, some development is very complex. Clarke and Connors (Clarke & O’Connor, 2012) found 8 classifications, 44 factors and 170 sub-factors. Jones (Kotter, 1995) identified 121 factors affecting quality alone. The large number of factors poses serious challenges to practitioners. Teams need to evaluate which factors are more important them and understand when certain factors be emphasized or downplayed.
Before moving further, we want to clarify the context for our discussion in this paper. Indeed our discussion about context requires a context. The context of our discussion is about agile adoption, the transition from a less agile approach to a more agile one. Kruchten (P. Kruchten, 2007) highlighted that successful agile adoption depended on context.Hoda, Kruchten, Noble, and Marshall (Hoda, Kruchten, Noble, & Marshall, 2010) conducted a Grounded Theory study and argued that development methods and practices must be adapted to fit their contexts.For example, agile adoption in a highly regulated context would be different from a less regulated one as reported by Fitzgerald, Stol, O'Sullivan, and O'Brien(Fritscher & Pigneur, 2010). Chow and Cao (Chow & Cao, 2008)found 36 factors affecting the success of agile adoption.Today, empirical studies (Begel, 2007; T. Dybå & Dingsøyr, 2008; Li, 2010) on agile methods are plentiful and easily accessible by practitioners. However, there is still very little work to provide a systematic approach to describe the context in which agile methods and adoption took place.