Extreme Programming: First Results from a Controlled Case Study

Authors:
Pekka Abrahamsson
Affiliations:
-
Venue:
EUROMICRO '03 Proceedings of the 29th Conference on EUROMICRO
Year:
2003

Citing 0
Cited 7

Motivations and measurements in an agile case study

Proceedings of the 2004 workshop on Quantitative techniques for software agile process
Motivations and measurements in an agile case study

Journal of Systems Architecture: the EUROMICRO Journal - Special issue: AGILE methodologies for software production
Efficient development of highly reusable distributed systems using the TCAO

ACST'07 Proceedings of the third conference on IASTED International Conference: Advances in Computer Science and Technology
A non-invasive method for the conformance assessment of pair programming practices based on hierarchical hidden Markov models

XP'07 Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Agile processes in software engineering and extreme programming
Transition from a plan-driven process to Scrum: a longitudinal case study on software quality

Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement
Measuring fidelity to extreme programming: a psychometric approach

Empirical Software Engineering
Software development and experimentation in an academic environment: the Gaudi experience

PROFES'05 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Extreme programming (XP) is the most well knownagile software development method. Many experiencereports have been published in recent years. SuccessfulXP adoptions have however been criticized for the lack ofconcrete data. While some exist, the studies are oftendifficult to compare due to different settings and thevarying level of XP adoption. This paper reports the firstresults (concrete data from 2/5 releases) from acontrolled extreme programming case study. Foursoftware engineers were acquired to implement a systemin a tight delivery schedule of eight weeks. Developmentenvironment was close to the agile home ground. Acomparison of the collected data from the first tworeleases is provided. Analysis shows that while the firstrelease is a learning effort for all stakeholders, the secondrelease shows clear improvement in all regards, e.g.,estimation accuracy is improved by 26%, productivitywas increased by 12 locs/hour and yet the post-releasedefect rate remained low, i.e., 2.1 defects/KLoc.