In this paper we critically examine the underlying assumptions in existing studies of
large-scale agile software development. We use Alvesson and Sandberg’s
problematization methodology and find that existing studies of large-scale agile share a
number of underlying assumptions relevant to small rather than large-scale projects.
Empirically, we draw on a case study of a large-scale agile project lasting nearly four
years and involving more than 120 participants. Interestingly, the findings of the study
contradict many of the assumptions in the literature review. For example, work across
boundaries becomes at least as important as work within teams. We contribute by
developing an alternative set of assumptions better suited to the characteristics of largescale
agile software development. Based on this, we re-conceptualize agile in the large,
emphasizing both the complex knowledge boundaries within the project itself, as well as
the interactive complexity and tight coupling with technologies and processes outside
the project.
History
Publication
37th International Conference on Information Systems;