##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Agile methodologies have emerged to challenge traditional ones and overcome their limitations. Increasingly, software development organizations are scaling agile practices in order to meet the requirements of the quickly changing and regularly developing business environment. The main objectives of this study are to investigate the main differences between the traditional project management methodologies and agile methodologies, as well as to identify some key advantages and challenges of applying agile development in a financial software environment. The findings clearly show that using Agile methodologies in a financial software development environment increases the efficiency and transparency of the development process, as well as the stakeholders’ satisfaction, but the project managers must know how to adapt different Agile frameworks to the given context of their organization.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Rose, K. H. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)—Fifth Edition. Project management journal, 3(44), e1-e1.
     Google Scholar
  2. Tarhan, A., & Demirors, O. (2011). Apply quantitative management now. IEEE software, 29(3), 77-85.
     Google Scholar
  3. Uskarcı, A., & Demirörs, O. (2017). Do staged maturity models result in organization-wide continuous process improvement? Insight from employees. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 52, 25-40.
     Google Scholar
  4. Tanrıöver, Ö. Ö., & Demirörs, O. (2015). A process capability based assessment model for software workforce in emergent software organizations. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 37, 29-40.
     Google Scholar
  5. Sulayman M, Mendes E. An extended systematic review of software process improvement in small and medium web companies. In15th Annual Conference on Evaluation & Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE 2011) 2011 Apr 11 (pp. 134-143). IET.
     Google Scholar
  6. Cass AG, Sutton SM, Osterweil LJ. Formalizing rework in software processes. InEuropean Workshop on Software Process Technology 2003 Sep 1 (pp. 16-31). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
     Google Scholar
  7. Boehm BW, Papaccio PN. Understanding and controlling software costs. IEEE transactions on software engineering. 1988 Oct;14(10):1462-77.
     Google Scholar
  8. Twentyman J. The crippling costs of IT project rework. Inside Knowledge. 2005 Jun 15;15.
     Google Scholar
  9. Charette RN. Why software fails [software failure]. IEEE spectrum. 2005 Sep 6;42(9):42-9.
     Google Scholar
  10. Davis AM, Bersoff EH, Comer ER. A strategy for comparing alternative software development life cycle models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 1988 Oct;14(10):1453-61.
     Google Scholar
  11. von Prince K. Paradigm-induced implicatures of TAM markers: The case of the Daakaka distal. InProceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 2018 (Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 969-984).
     Google Scholar
  12. Chen, Z., Li, Y., Wu, Y. and Luo, J. (2017), “The transition from traditional banking to mobile internet finance: an organizational innovation perspective - a comparative study of Citibank and ICBC”, Financial Innovation, Vol. 3 No. 1, p. 12.
     Google Scholar
  13. Lee, J.-C. and Chen, C.-Y. (2019), “Investigating the environmental antecedents of organizations’ intention to adopt agile software development”, Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. ahead-of-print, available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-06-2018-0119.
     Google Scholar
  14. Beck, K., Beedle, M., Van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R. and Kern, J., 2001. Manifesto for agile software development.
     Google Scholar
  15. Vilela J, Castro J, Martins LE, Gorschek T. Integration between requirements engineering and safety analysis: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software. 2017 Mar 1;125:68-92.
     Google Scholar
  16. Bowen S, Maurer F. Process support and knowledge management for virtual teams doing agile software development. In Proceedings 26th Annual International Computer Software and Applications 2002 Aug 26 (pp. 1118-1120). IEEE.
     Google Scholar
  17. Holz H, Maurer F. Knowledge management support for distributed agile software processes. In International Workshop on Learning Software Organizations 2002 Aug 6 (pp. 60-80). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
     Google Scholar
  18. Shameem M, Kumar RR, Nadeem M, Khan AA. Taxonomical classification of barriers for scaling agile methods in global software development environment using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Applied Soft Computing. 2020 May 1;90:106122.
     Google Scholar
  19. Awad, M.A. (2005), “A Comparison between Agile and Traditional Software Development Methodologies, This report is submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Honours”, The University of Western Australia.
     Google Scholar
  20. Kumar, G. and Bhatia, P. (2014), “Comparative Analysis of Software Engineering Models from Traditional to Modern Methodologies”, presented at the International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Technologies, ACCT, available at:https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCT.2014.73 .
     Google Scholar
  21. Liang, J. and Shekhar, S. (2018), “AGILE ADOPTION IN INVESTMENT BANKS”.
     Google Scholar
  22. Vinekar, V. and Huntley, C.L. (2010), “Agility versus Maturity: Is There Really a Trade-Off?”, Computer, Vol. 43 No. 5, pp. 87–89.
     Google Scholar
  23. Flora, H. (2014), “A Systematic Study on Agile Software Development Methodlogies and Practices”, International Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, Vol. 5, pp. 3626–3637.
     Google Scholar
  24. Javanmard M, Alian M. Comparison between Agile and Traditional software development methodologies. Fen Bilimleri Dergisi (CFD). 2015;36(3).
     Google Scholar
  25. De Carvalho, B. V. and Mello, C. H. P. (2017). “Scrum agile product development method-literature review, analysis and classification”. Product: Management and Development, 9(1), 39-49.
     Google Scholar
  26. McManus, J. (2004), “Managing Stakeholders in Software Development Projects”, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, ISBN: 9780750664554.
     Google Scholar
  27. Jureczko, M. (2008), “The Level of Agility in Testing Process in a Large Scale Financial Software Project”.
     Google Scholar
  28. Newkirk, J. (2002), “Introduction to agile processes and extreme programming”, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2002 (pp. 695-696). IEEE.
     Google Scholar
  29. SPGlobal (2020), 2018 US Fintech Market Report, SP Global, available at: https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/documents/2018-us-fintech-market-report.pdf (accessed on August 2020).
     Google Scholar
  30. McCarthy S, O'Raghallaigh P, Fitzgerald C, Adam F. Towards a framework for shared understanding and shared commitment in agile distributed ISD project teams. InECIS 2019, Proceedings of the 27th European Conference on Information Systems 2019 (pp. 1-15). AIS Electronic Library (AISeL).
     Google Scholar
  31. Roses, L.K., Windmöller, A., Carmo, E.A. do, Roses, L.K., Windmöller, A. and Carmo, E.A. do. (2016), “Favorability Conditions in the Adoption of Agile Method Practices for Software Development in a Public Banking”, JISTEM - Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 439–458.
     Google Scholar
  32. Newton N, Anslow C, Drechsler A. Information Security in Agile Software Development Projects: a Critical Success Factor Perspective.
     Google Scholar
  33. Mbama, C. I., & Ezepue, P. O. (2018). “Digital banking, customer experience and bank financial performance”. International Journal of Bank Marketing.
     Google Scholar
  34. Crosman, P. (2016), “Agile Development Is Reshaping Tech at Banks Like Chase and BBVA”, American Banker, available at: https://www.americanbanker.com/news/agile-development-is-reshaping-tech-at-banks-like-chase-and-bbva (accessed on August 2020).
     Google Scholar
  35. Sia, S. K., Soh, C., & Weill, P. (2016). “How DBS Bank Pursued a Digital Business Strategy”. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15(2).
     Google Scholar
  36. Sharma, A. (2020), Why Software Testing Is Very Important For Banking Applications?, available at:https://www.bugraptors.com/importance-of-qa-for-banking-applications/ .
     Google Scholar
  37. Chintala, S. and Mohan, N. (2020), “The intricacies of software testing”, available at: https://bankingfrontiers.com/the-intricacies-of-software-testing/ (accessed 12 April 2020).
     Google Scholar
  38. STH (2019), “The Implementation of a Banking Software for the Lending Sector in Practice”, available at: https://www.knowis.com/blog/implementation-of-a-banking-software-for-the-lending-sector-in-practice (accessed 23 January 2020).
     Google Scholar
  39. Murmann, S. (2018), “The Most Important Stakeholders in the Digital Transformation of Finance”, available at: https://www.knowis.com/blog/the-most-important-stakeholders-in-the-digital-transformation-of-finance (accessed 12 April 2020).
     Google Scholar
  40. Sternkopf, C. (2018), Software Testing Help, “The Implementation of A Banking Software for the Lending Sector in Practice”, available at: https://www.knowis.com/blog/implementation-of-a-banking-software-for-the-lending-sector-in-practice (accessed in August 2020).
     Google Scholar