Exploring the Benefits of Combining DevOps and Agile
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. DevOps Concepts and Model
- Culture: a cultural change focusing on collaboration and integration between developers’ team and operations’ team;
- Automation: a high level of automation to achieve continuous delivery running each code change through automated tests;
- Lean: the application of lean principles to increase efficiency and reduce complexity;
- Measurement: keeping key performance indicators for measuring performance and identifying where improvements can be achieved;
- Sharing: knowledge and best practice should be shared in the organization and across organizational boundaries.
2.2. Similarities and Differences between DevOps and Agile
3. Methodology
4. Results
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Limitations and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Dyba, T.; Dingsoyr, T. Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Inf. Soft. Tech. 2008, 50, 833–859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ergasheva, S.; Kruglov, A. Software Development Life Cycle early phases and quality metrics: A Systematic Literature Review. J. Physics. Conf. Ser. 2020, 1694, 012007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panwar, D.; Tomar, P.; Kumar, P. Innovative methods to make the component-based software development process more effective to produce quality software. J. Stat. Manag. Syst. 2017, 20, 765–775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sommerville, I. Software Engineering; India Education Services: Bengaluru, India, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Shore, J.; Warden, S. The Art of Agile Development; O’Reilly Media: Newton, MA, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Petersen, K.; Wohlin, C. A comparison of issues and advantages in agile and incremental development between state of the art and an industrial case. J. Syst. Soft 2009, 82, 1479–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gregory, P.; Taylor, K. Defining Agile Culture: A Collaborative and Practitioner-Led Approach. In Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 12th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE), Montreal, QC, Canada, 27 May 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tolfo, C.; Wazlawick, R.S.; Ferreira, M.G.; Forcellini, F.A. Agile methods and organizational culture: Reflections about cultural levels. J. Soft Maint. Evol. Res. Pract. 2011, 23, 423–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Junker, T.L.; Bakker, A.B.; Gorgievski, M.J.; Derks, D. Agile work practices and employee proactivity: A multilevel study. Hum. Relat. 2021; in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweetman, R.; Conboy, K. Portfolios of Agile Projects: A Complex Adaptive Systems’ Agent Perspective. Proj. Manag. J. 2018, 49, 18–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brink, T. Managing uncertainty for sustainability of complex projects. Int. J. Manag. Proj. in Bus. 2017, 10, 315–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luz, W.P.; Pinto, G.; Bonifácio, R. Building a collaborative culture: A grounded theory of well succeeded devops adoption in practice. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, Oulu, Finland, 11–12 October 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Leite, L.; Rocha, C.; Kon, F.; Milojicic, D.; Meirelles, P. A Survey of DevOps Concepts and Challenges. ACM Comp. Surv. 2019, 52, 127–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rajapakse, R.N.; Zahedi, M.; Babar, M.A.; Shen, H. Challenges and solutions when adopting DevSecOps: A systematic review. Inf. Soft Tech. 2022, 141, 106700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wiedemann, A.; Wiesche, M.; Gewald, H.; Krcmar, H. Understanding how DevOps aligns development and operations: A tripartite model of intra-IT alignment. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2020, 29, 458–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jabbari, R.; bin Ali, N.; Petersen, K.; Tanveer, B. Towards a benefits dependency network for DevOps based on a systematic literature review. J. Soft: Evol. Proc. 2018, 30, e1957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joby, P. Exploring DevOps: Challenges and Benefits. J. Inf. Tech. Dig. World 2019, 1, 27–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hemon, A.; Lyonnet, B.; Rowe, F.; Fitzgerald, B. From Agile to DevOps: Smart Skills and Collaborations. Inf. Syst. Front. 2020, 22, 927–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melgar, A.S.; Osores, J.; Osores, R.; Relaiza, H.R.; Flores, J.A.; Orihuela, V.H.; Lozano, R.A. DevOps as a culture of interaction and deployment in an insurance company. Turk. J. Comp. Mat. Educ. 2021, 12, 1701–1708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hammond, P.; Allspaw, J. 10+ Deploys Per Day: Dev and Ops Cooperation at Flickr [Video]. 25 June 2009. Available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdOe18KhtT4 (accessed on 28 December 2021).
- Frederic, P. The Incredible True Story of How DevOps Got Its Name [Web Log Message]. 6 May 2014. Available online: https://newrelic.com/blog/nerd-life/devops-name (accessed on 28 December 2021).
- Fitzpatrick, L.; Dillon, M. The Business Case for Devops: A Five-Year Retrospective. Cutter. IT J. 2011, 24, 19–27. [Google Scholar]
- Wiedemann, A.; Forsgren, N.; Wiesche, M.; Gewald, H.; Krcmar, H. Research for Practice: The DevOps Phenomenon. Com. ACM 2019, 62, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stahl, D.; Mårtensson, T.; Bosch, J. Continuous Practices and Devops: Beyond the Buzz, What Does it All Mean? In Proceedings of the 43rd Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), Vienna, Austria, 30–31 August 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larman, C.; Basili, V.R. Iterative and Incremental Development: A Brief History. Computer 2003, 36, 47–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tozzi, C. 5 Problems with DevOps [Web Log Message]. 12 January 2021. Available online: https://www.itprotoday.com/devops-and-software-development/5-problems-devops (accessed on 28 December 2021).
- Lwakatare, L.E.; Kuvaja, P.; Oivo, M. Relationship of DevOps to Agile, Lean and Continuous Deployment. In Product-Focused Software Process Improvement; Abrahamsson, P., Jedlitschka, A., Nguyen Duc, A., Felderer, M., Amasaki, S., Mikkonen, T., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 399–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Liu, C. Adopting DevOps in Agile: Challenges and Solutions. Adopting DevOps in Agile: Challenges and Solutions. 29 June 2018. Available online: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1228684&dswid=5071 (accessed on 2 January 2022).
- Galup, S.; Dattero, R.; Quan, J. What Do Agile, Lean, and ITIL Mean to DevOps? Com. ACM 2020, 63, 48–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hema, V.; Thota, S.; Kumar, S.N.; Padmaja, C.; Krishna, C.B.; Mahender, K. Scrum: An Effective Software Development Agile Tool. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020, 981, 022060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santos, P.S.; Beltrão, A.C.; Souza, B.P.; Travassos, G.H. On the benefits and challenges of using kanban in software engineering: A structured synthesis study. J. Soft Eng. Res. Dev. 2018, 6, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fojtik, R. Extreme Programming in development of specific software. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2011, 3, 1464–1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sani, A.; Arbain, A.F.; Jeong, S.R.; Ghani, I. A Review on Software Development Security Engineering using Dynamic System Method (DSDM). Int. J. Comp. Applic 2013, 69, 33–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mousaei, M.; Gandomani, T.J. DevOps Approach and Lean Thinking in Agile Software Development: Opportunities, Advantages, and Challenges. J. Soft Eng. Int. Syst. 2020, 5, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
- Hamunen, J. Challenges in Adopting a Devops Approach to Software Development and Operations. 23 July 2016. Available online: https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/20766 (accessed on 2 January 2022).
- Marnewick, C.; Langerman, J. DevOps and Organizational Performance: The Fallacy of Chasing Maturity. IEEE Soft 2021, 38, 48–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Subramanian, A.; Krishnamachariar, P.K.; Gupta, M.; Sharman, R. Auditing an Agile Development Operations Ecosystem. In Research Anthology on Agile Software, Software Development, and Testing; International Management Association, Ed.; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2022; pp. 1154–1176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faustino, J.; Pereira, R.; Alturas, B.; Silva, M.M.D. Agile Information Technology Service Management with DevOps: An Incident Management Case Study. Int. J. Agile Syst. Manag. 2020, 13, 339–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dörnenburg, E. The Path to DevOps. IEEE Soft 2018, 35, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Céspedes, D.; Angeleri, P.; Melendez, K.; Dávila, A. Software Product Quality in DevOps Contexts: A Systematic Literature Review. In Trends and Applications in Software Engineering; Mejia, J., Muñoz, M., Rocha, Á., Calvo-Manzano, J.A., Eds.; Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 51–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nybom, K.; Smeds, J.; Porres, I. On the Impact of Mixing Responsibilities Between Devs and Ops. In Agile Processes, in Software Engineering, and Extreme Programming; Sharp, H., Hall, T., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 131–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Merriam, S.B.; Tisdell, E.J. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Dyba, T.; Prikladnicki, R.; Rönkkö, K.; Seaman, C.; Sillito, J. Qualitative research in software engineering. Emp. Soft Eng. 2011, 16, 425–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Danesh, A.S.; Saybani, M.R.; Danesh, S.Y. Software release management challenges in industry: An exploratory study. Afri. J. Bus. Manag. 2011, 5, 8050–8056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ogheneovo, E. Software Dysfunction: Why Do Software Fail? J. Comp. Commun. 2014, 2, 25–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Fabro, V. The Unified Value of Agile and DevOps. 14 December 2020. Available online: https://www.insight.com/en_US/content-and-resources/tech-journal/winter-2020/the-unified-value-of-agile-and-devops.html (accessed on 5 January 2022).
- Hemon-Hildgen, A.; Rowe, F.; Monnier-Senicourt, L. Orchestrating automation and sharing in DevOps teams: A revelatory case of job satisfaction factors, risk and work conditions. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 2020, 29, 474–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, N.; Daneth, H.; Hong, J.E. A hybrid DevOps process supporting software reuse: A pilot project. J. Soft Evol. Proc. 2020, 32, e2248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DeFranco, J.F.; Laplante, P.A. Review and Analysis of Software Development Team Communication Research. IEEE Trans. Prof. Commun. 2017, 60, 165–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmutz, J.B.; Meier, L.L.; Manser, T. How effective is teamwork really? The relationship between teamwork and performance in healthcare teams: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 2019, 9, e028280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Cois, C.A.; Yankel, J.; Connell, A. Modern DevOps: Optimizing software development through effective system interactions. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Professional Communication Conference (IPCC), Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 13–15 October 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, N.; Gondkar, R. Role of ITOps in DevOps. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Innovative Computing & Communication (ICICC), New Delhi, India, 19–20 February 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Reifer, D. Is Merging Agile and DevOps Worth the Pain? 17 January 2019. Available online: https://www.cutter.com/article/merging-agile-and-devops-worth-pain-501791 (accessed on 5 January 2022).
- Ozanich, A. DevOps Lifecycle vs Agile Methodology: Learning the Difference. 18 November 2021. Available online: https://blog.hubspot.com/website/devops-vs-agile (accessed on 5 January 2022).
- Ebert, C.; Gallardo, G.; Hermantes, J.; Serrano, N. DevOps. IEEE Soft 2016, 33, 94–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luz, W.P.; Pinto, G.; Bonifácio, R. Adopting DevOps in the real world: A theory, a model, and a case study. J. Syst. Soft 2019, 157, 110384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clavier, P.; Kaminski, A. How We Applied a DevOps Mindset to Manage Our People Data. 15 January 2021. Available online: https://tdwi.org/articles/2021/01/15/biz-all-apply-devops-mindset-to-manage-people-data.aspx (accessed on 7 January 2022).
- Venugopal, D. DevOps: Driving Innovation with Old Habits. 1 September 2020. Available online: https://devops.com/devops-driving-innovation-with-old-habits/ (accessed on 7 January 2022).
Problem with Agile Development | DevOps Solution |
---|---|
Delivery of new features to the customer is often delayed. | DevOps tools are used to test and release new features as they are completed. |
Completed software components are not compatible with each other. | Open interfaces and test automation make it possible to divide development into independent yet compatible parts. |
Quality of the product is not ensured properly prior to release. | DevOps tools and practices help automating quality assurance and reduce the need for repetitive manual work. |
New features break old functions. | The quality of existing functions is ensured quickly and automatically after each change. |
Budget goals and deadlines are missed. | The tools and procedures of DevOps increase the transparency and predictability of the development work. |
Developer teams and IT operations crews are not cooperating. | Developer teams and IT operations crews agree upon responsibilities together. Their goals are unified. |
ID | Country | Description |
---|---|---|
CS1 | India | A company that operates in the IT outsourcing services market in building technological solutions in areas such as web apps, mobile apps, cloud strategy, analytics and business intelligence, testing, quality assurance services, and Agile project management. Their report looks to different ways to enable DevOps in Agile environments. |
CS2 | USA | Information technology company and advanced training for IT professionals in the fields of programming and technological development. Their report explores the relevance of Agile principles for deployment activities. |
CS3 | Canada | A global company that offers consulting services to help companies adjust their development teams by integrating new practices and technologies. Their report explores how Agile practices should be updated considering the needs of operations teams in organizations. |
CS4 | USA | Cloud services provider offering technology infrastructures based on public cloud, private cloud, hybrid cloud, and multi-cloud. Their report explores the difference and similarities between both paradigms. |
CS5 | Australia | Australian software company that develops products for software developers, project managers, and other software development teams. Their press release presents how automation processes can be implemented using a combination of both paradigms. |
CS6 | USA | Global business and technology consulting firm dedicated to helping organizations leverage emerging technologies and the latest business management thinking to achieve competitive advantage and mission success. Provides consulting and training services, primarily targeted at executives. Their article explores the differences between the two paradigms and suggests points of convergence between them. |
CS7 | USA | Company specialized in the dissemination of technological information in the field of information and communication technologies. Their press release looks to important aspects observed while combining DevOps and Agile. |
CS8 | USA | Multinational company in information technologies that develops automation solutions and advanced knowledge in areas such as automation, enterprise DevOps, data-driven business, and adaptive cybersecurity. Their article explores the role that Agile practices can play in DevOps. |
CS9 | Switzerland | Company that operates mainly in the European market in providing captivating scalable cloud-based solutions. Their article looks at the isolated benefits of each paradigm and tries to predict the benefits of their combined adoption. |
CS10 | India | Company that develops technological solutions for the education field and relies on the application of the Agile scalability paradigm, especially the SAFe model. Their article explores the change-driven management approach and looks at how DevOps and SCRUM address this challenge. |
CS11 | Germany | IT company that operates in the global market implementing cloud solutions, DevOps, software testing, quality assurance, artificial intelligence, and big data. Their press release looks at the problems in software engineering that the joint adoption of both paradigms can solve. |
CS12 | UK | A consulting company that aims to optimize work processes in organizations using cloud solutions, slack, and Trello services. Their press release looks at the role of the cloud and Agile methodologies in developing the DevOps paradigm. |
ID | Benefit |
---|---|
CS1 | (BF1) Time to market: greater collaboration between teams reduces software delivery cycles (BF2) Automation: the combined development and production process becomes more automated to meet market needs |
CS2 | (BF2) Automation: continuous delivery and integration combined with fast releases lead to the automation of activities (BF3) Communication: promote constant communication between development and operational team (BF4) Mindset and culture: establishment of collaboration among teams |
CS3 | (BF1) Time to market: through continuous delivery from the development phases (BF5) Planning: the product backlog now includes services are products that need to be deployed, scalable, maintained, monitored, and supported as a service |
CS4 | (BF4) Mindset and culture: increase the quality of collaboration (BF6) Visibility: more visibility for release and upgrade processes (BF7) Risk mitigation: better identification of risks in the context of each sprint (BF8) Software quality: decrease the existence of software errors and helps to launch faster patches |
CS5 | (BF2) Automation: contribution for the implementation of Agile fluency model which focus on value, transparency, and alignment (BF3) Communication: amplify feedback loops between development and operational team (BF4) Mindset and culture: looks to the performance of all system instead of local departments. Furthermore, promotes learning from failure. (BF5) Planning: increase the planning dimension of unplanned events typically found in the context of operational teams |
CS6 | (BF1) Time to market: deployment chains cut the time needed to get a product to market (BF9). Cost: combining people and activities makes people more multi-skilled with future reduction in human resource costs |
CS7 | (BF2) Automation: increasing code size and complexity encourages process automation (BF3) Communication: communication between both teams is constant with feedback loops (BF10): Software quality: functional and load tests are both considered (BF11). Efficiency: project management considers performance metrics that result from combined methods in both areas |
CS8 | (BF1) Time to market: integrated processes make order fulfillment faster (BF6) Visibility: increased visibility over data and processes (BF9) Cost: increased productivity and team performance |
CS9 | (BF2) Automation: increase speed and agility to attend continuous requirements changes (BF3) Communication: smooth communication between the team and the customers by continual iteration (BF12) Flexibility: agility in the face of continuous requests for revision becomes important to make the organization competitive |
CS10 | (BF2) Automation: implementation of a paradigm based in continuous integration, continuous delivery, and continuous deployment (BF3) Communication: by fostering communication in the teams, constant collaboration is promoted |
CS11 | (BF2): Automation: shorten the development cycle by promoting the automation of repetitive tasks (BF10) Software quality: focus on end-product quality |
CS12 | (BF2) Automation: better performance when compared against on-premise DevOps automation. Furthermore, it contributes to eliminates human errors (BF12) Flexibility: it empowers each stage of the application delivery lifecycle |
Benefit | CS1 | CS2 | CS3 | CS4 | CS5 | CS6 | CS7 | CS8 | CS9 | CS10 | CS11 | CS12 | Ranking |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BF1 | X | X | X | X | #3 | ||||||||
BF2 | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | #1 | ||||
BF3 | X | X | X | X | X | #2 | |||||||
BF4 | X | X | X | #4 | |||||||||
BF5 | X | X | #5 | ||||||||||
BF6 | X | X | #5 | ||||||||||
BF7 | X | #10 | |||||||||||
BF8 | X | #10 | |||||||||||
BF9 | X | X | #5 | ||||||||||
BF10 | X | X | #5 | ||||||||||
BF11 | X | #10 | |||||||||||
BF12 | X | X | #5 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Almeida, F.; Simões, J.; Lopes, S. Exploring the Benefits of Combining DevOps and Agile. Future Internet 2022, 14, 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi14020063
Almeida F, Simões J, Lopes S. Exploring the Benefits of Combining DevOps and Agile. Future Internet. 2022; 14(2):63. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi14020063
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlmeida, Fernando, Jorge Simões, and Sérgio Lopes. 2022. "Exploring the Benefits of Combining DevOps and Agile" Future Internet 14, no. 2: 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi14020063
APA StyleAlmeida, F., Simões, J., & Lopes, S. (2022). Exploring the Benefits of Combining DevOps and Agile. Future Internet, 14(2), 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi14020063