Study Report. Status Quo Agile 2014

Transcription

1 Study Report Status Quo Agile 2014 Second study on success and forms of usage of agile methods by the BPM-Laboratory of the Koblenz University of Applied Sciences Director Prof. Dr. Ayelt Komus BPM-Lab, Prof. Dr. A. Komus In cooperation with GPM - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Projektmanagement and the International Project Management Association (IPMA)

2 Imprint Version First publication July 15, 2014 Version 1.0, July 2014 Copyright BPM Laboratory, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Prof. Dr. Komus All rights reserved. The usage of extracts or single diagrams is allowed stating the source: Source: Study Status Quo Agile, BPM-Laboratory, Koblenz University of Applied Sciences, Prof. Dr. Komus Permission can be revoked at anytime. Disclaimer The contents were carefully researched and evaluated. However, errors can not be excluded. We do not assume any liability for correctness and completeness. The authors explicitly exclude any liability for possible damage, which is created by direct or indirect use of the provided information. Authors and realization: Prof. Dr. Ayelt Komus (HS Koblenz) Moritz Kuberg, B.Sc. (HS Koblenz) Can Atinc Lukas Franner Fabian Friedrich Tamara Lang Anna Makarova Dominik Reimer Johanna Pabst Contact: Koblenz University of Applied Sciences BPM-Laboratory Konrad-Zuse-Str Koblenz info@status-quo-agile.net Prof. Dr. Komus komus@hs-koblenz.de 2

3 Highlights (1/4) The majority of the users of agile methods use them selectively or in combination. Only about one fourth of the participants use agile methods consistently. Nearly two thirds of the participants have been using agile methods for four years. As expected, agile methods are especially used in the area of software development. Even so, only IT-related topics and activities without references to IT account for 41% respectively 27%. The success rate of agile methods is evaluated more positively than the success rate of classical project management. The positive evaluation of the success of agile methods in this survey corresponds to the results of the survey from Once again consistently agile users had the highest rate of success. Only 7% of the respondents state that agile methods do not lead to an improvement in results and efficiency. 3

4 Highlights (2/4) Only 7% of the respondents stated that there is a disadvantageous relationship between the improvement and the effort of introducing agile methods. With 86%, the most used method is Scrum. Kanban, XP and Feature Driven Development follow. The respondents rated agile methods consistently better than classic project management methods regarding specific success criteria like the Quality of results, Adherence to schedule and Employee motivation. Regarding specific success criteria, Scrum is rated better than every other method. Scrum, Kanban, Lean and Design Thinking are rated more positively than classical project management in all criteria. The motivation of the team and teamwork is evaluated remarkably positively for Scrum, Kanban, XP and Design Thinking. Regarding the adherence to schedule and the efficiency, Lean, Kanban and Scrum are evaluated remarkably positively. 4

5 Highlights (3/4) Six of the seven most often used techniques are specific Scrum techniques. 15 of 22 rated techniques are used by a minimum of 70% of the users of consistently agile methods. A team size of 5-9 persons dominates. The majority of users of classic project management work in teams of this size, too. 93% of the respondents have a Scrum Master certificate, but about 40% stated that he is supported by a traditional project manager or even acts like a traditional project manager. 75% of the respondents stated, that a Sprint does not run longer than three weeks. Less than 50% of the Scrum-Users use an Impediment Backlog. About 32% of the participants who use Kanban analyze the flow systematically. 5

6 Highlights (4/4) Only about 6% of the users of agile methods and 10% of the users of classic project management evaluated project teams as being undisciplined. 74% of the users of agile methods stated that change is an integral part of the company policy. Only 55% of the users of classic project management stated the same. BPM-Labor, Prof. Dr. A. Komus 6

7 Contents Introductory remarks 8 Fields of application and usage of agile methods 15 Benefit and success rate of agile methods 26 Importance of single agile methods 37 Evaluation of agile methods 51 General Assessments to agile methods 109 Change Process 114 Background of the participants and methods 123 Explanatory notes on the methodology 140 Contact 144 Forms of usage of agile methods 78 Specific questions about agile methods 93 7

8 Introductory Remarks Back To Table Of Content 8

9 Introductory Remarks Introduction Design of the study Reading Hints The term project 9

10 Introduction The first edition of Status Quo Agile was conducted in 2012 with more than 300 participants. The feedback of participants, media and conferences exceeded our expectations by far. The interest to understand the fields of usage, the success and the success factors of agile methods seems to be high. Two years later agile methods such as Scrum and IT-Kanban are even more established and used outside the software development in the daily work. With Design Thinking there is another method, which contains a lot of agile elements. Because of this we included Design Thinking in our study. see Representativeness, significance and relevance at the end of this report In 2014 our study was designed to allow an even better understanding of how agile methods are used in daily work, and how successful these methods are. On the basis of Status Quo Agile 2012 we noticed that a hybrid or selective form of usage together with classical project management is very popular. In this study we also examined how widespread the different agile techniques. For the users of Scrum, IT-Kanban and Design Thinking we added additional questions to understand these practices better. Even though there are always methodological limitations for study like this*, we are confident that the sample of more than 600 participants from more than 30 countries is large enough to allow conclusions that are highly informative and meaningful. We hope that you will have an inspiring and informative reading. The Team of Status Quo Agile

11 Design Of The Study This is the new edition of the study Status Quo Agile 2012 from the BPM-Labor at the University of Applied Sciences Koblenz. On basis of the results from 2012 and the latest developments in agile methods the design of the study was adapted and improved. Over six weeks the study was released for participation. It reached 612 participants from 37 countries. To get a more detailed questionnaire, we distinguished four forms of usage, which you will see on the next-but-one page. The different forms of usage are displayed by four rectangular symbols. Additional questions were asked regarding the forms of usage of Scrum, Design Thinking and IT-Kanban. These results are included in the report as well. 11

12 Reading Hints Highlights Charts marked with a yellow star highlight results, which are considered particularly interesting by the authors. This should help readers, who read the report selectively. Rounding deviation Rounding of percentage values may lead to sums deviating from 100%. 12

13 Reading Hints: Four Forms Of Usage Within this report, it is distinguished between four forms of usage of agile methods/ classic project management. To give a good orientation, these forms are marked with the symbols explained on the righthand side. Consistently agile Projects/development processes are (almost) exclusively controlled and managed with agile methods. Hybrid Projects / development processes are controlled and managed with a combination of agile methods and classic methods. Selective Some selected projects / development processes are controlled and managed with agile methods. Other projects are processed with classic project management methods. Consistently classic project management Projects / development processes are (almost) exclusively controlled and managed with classic project management methods. und agile Selective, Consistently classic project management ) 13

14 The Term Project Agile methods are not project management methods in the proper sense. A characteristic feature of a project is the uniqueness of the conditions as a whole. Projects have clear targets and are limited by both time and financial resources. There is a big difference between classical project management and agile methods, such as Scrum or IT-Kanban. Agile methods do not strive for a single one-time result, but the continues flow and a continuous development and improvement of the product by incremental deliveries. Nevertheless, it is apparent that in practice both methods are closely connected with each other. Agile methods are very often used in classical project management to complement or to expand existing techniques. As a result we see hybrid approaches as well as a selective usage of agile methods in combination with classical project management. Following this approach the study takes into account the different forms of usage of agile methods and project management and compares them systematically even though they are fundamentally different. Due to methodological limitations the results of these comparisons have to be interpreted very carefully. However, the results should be very valuable for many companies using agile methods or considering implementing them in place of or in combination with classic project management. Eventually, it is fair to assume that the appropriate perspective of the task as a one time effort or as continuous effort to develop, maintain and improve a product is far more crucial than the question on how to apply a method perfectly. 14

15 Fields Of Application And Usage Of Agile Methods Back To Table Of Content 15

16 Fields Of Application And Usage Of Agile Methods Methods used Personal use of agile methods Usage of agile methods in the company Field of application IT-Focus of agile activities 16

17 Methods Used 39% of the respondents stated that single projects/ development processes are controlled and managed selectively. Projects / development processes are controlled and managed 25% stated that projects/ development processes are processed as a combination of agile methods and classic methods, which is referred to here as Hybrid. 15% 21% Particularly remarkable is the fact that only 21% of the participants control and manage projects/ development processes almost exclusively with the help of agile methods. Durchgängig Consistently agile Mischform Hybrid (Hybrid) Though this survey carries the word agile in its title, users of classic project management also participated, which was wanted. 25% Sowohl Selective als auch (Selektiv) Durchgängig Consistently classic klassisch project management Finally, the majority of the respondents do not use either classic methods nor agile methods exclusively! 39% n=601 (Nur (single eine choice, Antwort mandatory möglich, question) Pflichtangabe) und Selective, Consistently classic project management ) 17

18 Personal Use Of Agile Methods (1/4) All agile users About 61% of the participants first got in contact with agile methods in the last four years. Since 2010 the use of agile methods has increased. It is to be noted that the answer 2014 has to interpreted carefully as the study has been performed at the middle of the year % 20% 15% Since when do you personally use agile methods? 14% 14% 21% 12% Regarding the comparison, it is remarkable that more participants who use agile methods exclusively use them since 2005 or earlier than all of the other agile users do. 10% 5% 9% 3% 3% 6% 8% 6% 3% 1% 0% n=386 (Nur (single eine choice) Antwort möglich) und Selective ) 18

19 Personal Use Of Agile Methods (2/4) Comparison 2012/2014 All agile users Since when do you personally use agile methods? (2012) Since when do you personally use agile methods? (2014) 25% 25% 20% 19% 20% 19% 20% 21% 15% 13% 15% 14% 14% 12% 10% 10% 10% 9% 8% 5% 6% 6% 3% 3% 5% 1% 3% 3% 6% 6% 3% 0% before vor % Survey 2012, n=156 n=386 (Nur (single eine choice) Antwort möglich) und Selective ) 19

20 Personal Use Of Agile Methods (3/4) 2014 agile users by groups Since when do you personally use agile methods? 25% Consistently Durchgängig agile n=100 n=100 Hybrid n=165 Selektiv Selective n=121 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% no Keine statement Angabe vor before und Selective ) 20

21 Personal Use Of Agile Methods (4/4) 2012 agile users by groups Since when do you personally use agile methods? (2012) 35,0% 30,0% 25,0% 20,0% 15,0% 10,0% 5,0% 0,0% vor before (Survey 2012) "Durchgängig Consistently agile agil" n=37 n=37 "Mischform" Hybrid n=53 "Sowohl-als-auch" Selective n=66 n=53 n=66 und Selective ) 21

22 Usage Of Agile Methods In The Company (1/2) All agile users The use of agile methods in companies increased since 2010, which corresponds to the results of the personal use. Even so, the use of agile methods of companies generally started later than the personal use of agile methods. (35% before 2010 personal, 24% before 2010 companies) 25% 20% 15% Since when are agile methods used in your area of the company? 16% 15% 21% 15% 10% 5% 5% 4% 4% 7% 7% 4% 1% 1% 0% n=386 (single (Nur eine choice) Antwort möglich) und Selective ) 22

23 Usage Of Agile Methods In The Company (2/2) Comparison 2012/2014 All agile users Since when are agile methods used in your area of the company? (2012) Since when are agile methods used in your area of the company? (2014) 25% 20% 22% 22% 25% 20% 21% 15% 15% 16% 15% 16% 15% 15% 10% 5% 0% 7% vor 2005 before 6% 6% 4% 2% % 5% 0% 5% 4% 1% 1% 4% 7% 7% 4% Survey 2012, n=138 n=386 (single (Nur eine choice) Antwort möglich) und Selective ) 23

24 Field Of Application - IT-Focus Of Agile Activities (1/2) All agile users Software-Development as a field of application of agile methods still outweighs all other areas. Nevertheless for more than 25% of the participants, activities without IT-reference are a relevant field of application for agile methods. This distribution does not significantly change when differentiated by the form of usage (Consistently agile, Hybrid, Selective). 100% 80% 60% In which areas do you use agile methods/project management? 90% 40% 20% 41% 27% 0% Software-Development Software-Entwicklung IT-related IT-nahe topics Themen (for Activities Aktivitäten without ohne example (bspw. SAP-Projekte) SAP-projects) besonderen references to IT-Bezug n=387 (Mehrfachantworten (multiple choice) möglich) und Selective ) 24

25 Field Of Application - IT-Focus Of Agile Activities (2/2) Agile users by groups 100% In which areas do you use agile methods/project management? 80% 60% 40% Durchgängig Consistently agile n=100 hybrid Hybrid n=166 selektiv Selective n=121 n=122 (multiple Mehrfachantworten choice) möglich 20% 0% Software-Entwicklung Software-Development IT-related IT-nahe Themen topics (for (bspw. example SAP-Projekte) SAP-projects) Aktivitäten Activities ohne without besonderen references IT-Bezug to und Selective ) 25

26 Benefit And Success Rate Of Agile Methods Back To Table Of Content 26

27 Benefit And Success Rate Of Agile Methods Success rate of agile & classical methods Improvement of results and efficiency due to agile methods Improvement in comparison to the efforts 27

28 Success Rate Of Agile & Classical Methods (1/7) Introduction - All groups The success rate of projects / development processes is very high when agile methods are in use (majority over 79%). A comparison with the study from 2012 shows that the answers are more diversified, but in the whole similar. The median is again 80-89%. The success rate of classic project management, rated by classic user is significantly worse than the success rate of agile methods, rated by agile user (t-test: p<0,001). The difference of the success rate of classic project management rated by consistently agile user and classic project management user are significant worse (chi-square-test: p<0,006). Again like in 2012 consistently agile users have the highest percentage of highly successful activities (90%-100%). und Selective, Consistently classic project management ) 28

29 Success Rate Of Agile & Classical Methods (2/7) Comparison agile user and classical user The success rate of classic project management, rated by classic user is significantly worse than the success rate of agile methods, rated by agile user (t-test: p<0,001). How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with agile methods? How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with classic methods? 0-9% 0% 0-9% 0% % 1% 10-19% 4% % 0% 20-29% 1% % 1% 30-39% 4% % 3% 40-49% 2% % 9% 50-59% 9% % 8% 60-69% 22% % 26% 70-79% 33% % 28% 80-89% 21% % 24% % 5% n=375 (Nur (single eine choice) Antwort möglich) Median (Responses from the categories Consistently agile, Hybrid, und Selective ) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% n=82 (single der Teilnehmer, choice) die durchgängig klassische Methoden verwenden (Nur eine Antwort möglich) o (Responses from the category Consistently classic project management ) Median 29

30 Success Rate Of Agile & Classical Methods (3/7) Comparison 2012/2014 All agile users How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with agile methods? (2012) How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with agile methods? (2014) 0-9% 0-9 % 0% 10-19% % 1% % 1% % 0% 30-39% 1% % 1% 40-49% 1% % 3% 50-59% 2% % 9% % 6% % 8% % 34% % 26% % 34% % 28% % 21% % 24% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Survey 2012, n=173 (single choice) Median 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% n=375 (Nur (single eine choice) Antwort möglich) Median und Selective ) 30

31 Success Rate Of Agile & Classical Methods (4/7) Comparison 2012/2014 All agile users Wie How hoch would würden you estimate Sie Ihre the Erfolgsquote success rate der of mit projects/development klassischen Methoden processes durchgeführten performed Projekte/Entwicklungsprozesse with classic methods? (2012) einschätzen? (2012) 0-9% 10-19% % 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% % % 4% 6% 10% 10% 23% 25% 0-9 % % % % % % % % How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with classic methods? (2014) 1% 2% 8% 9% 11% 14% 15% 21% % 16% % 13% % 5% % 6% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Median Survey 2012, n=115 (single choice) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% n=375 (Nur (single eine choice) Antwort möglich) und Selective ) Median 31

32 Success Rate Of Agile & Classical Methods (5/7) Comparison agile user and classical user The difference of the success rate of classic project management rated by consistently agile user and classic project management user are significant worse (chi-square-test: p<0,006). How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with classic methods? How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with classic methods? 0-9 % 1% 0-9% 0% % 2% 10-19% 4% % 8% 20-29% 1% % 9% 30-39% 4% % 11% 40-49% 2% % 21% 50-59% 9% % 14% 60-69% 22% % 15% 70-79% 33% % 13% 80-89% 21% % 6% % 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% n=373 (Nur (single eine choice) Antwort möglich) Median (Responses from the categories Consistently agile, Hybrid, und Selective ) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% n=82 (single der Teilnehmer, choice) die durchgängig klassische Methoden verwenden (Nur eine Antwort möglich) o (Responses from the category Consistently classic project management ) Median 32

33 Success Rate Of Agile & Classical Methods (6/7) Comparison 2012/2014 consistently agile users How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with classic methods? (2012) How would you estimate the success rate of projects/development processes performed with classic methods? (2014) 0-9% 10-19% % 30-39% 40-49% 11% 11% 17% 0-9 % % % % % 1% 3% 3% 8% 24% 50-59% 19% % 19% % 19% % 18% % 11% % 17% % 8% % 4% % 3% % 3% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Median Survey 2012, n=36 of the participants, who use o agile methods consistently (single choice) o 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% n=96 of the participants, who use agile methods consistently (single choice) (Responses from the category Consistently agile ) Median 33

34 Success Rate Of Agile & Classical Methods (7/7) Agile users by groups 35% Wie How hoch would würden you estimate Sie Ihre Erfolgsquote the success rate der of mit projects/development agilen Methoden durchgeführten processes performed Projekte / with Entwicklungsprozesse agile methods? (2014) einschätzen? (2014) Consistently Durchgängig agile n=98 hybrid Hybrid n=161 selektiv Selective n=116 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 0-9% % % % % % % % % % und Selective ) 34

35 Improvement Of Results And Efficiency Due To Agile Methods All agile users 80% of the participants said, that the usage of agile methods makes development processes more successful and efficient. Did the usage of agile methods lead to improved results and efficiency? 13% 7% Yes Ja No Nein No Keine statement Angabe 80% n=388 (single (Nur eine choice) Antwort möglich) und Selective ) 35

36 Improvement In Comparison To The Efforts All agile users The data shows that the improvements due to the implementation of agile methods are much higher than the efforts of the implementation. Only 7% believe the contrary. If so,* how do you evaluate the improvement compared to the effort of the implementation and usage of agile methods? 6% 1% 29% Verbesserung Improvement sehr viel much höher higher als than der Aufwand effort Improvement higher Verbesserung höher als than der effort Aufwand 64% Improvement Verbesserung lower than effort geringer als der Aufwand Verbesserung Improvement sehr viel much geringer lower than als der Aufwand effort n=312 (single (Nur eine choice) Antwort * Referring möglich) to the question: Did the usage of agile methods lead to improved results and efficiency? und Selective ) 36

37 Importance Of Single Agile Methods Back To Table Of Content 37

38 Importance Of Single Agile Methods Importance of agile methods for the own field 38

39 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (1/12) Scrum, Kanban, XP and Feature Driven Development have the highest importance, which confirms the results of Status Quo Agile The Order of the three most important methods did not change. It must be noticed that the methods Lean, Design Thinking, Lean Startup and Unified Process were picked up first in this survey as additional options. Still, Crystal has the lowest importance. 39

40 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (2/12) All agile users How important are the following methods for your area? Scrum Kanban ("IT-Kanban") Extreme Programming (XP)(inkl. incl. Test Driven Development) Feature Driven Development Lean Design Thinking Adaptive Software Development Agile Modeling Usability Driven Development Lean Startup Dynamic System Development Method Unified Process (incl. RUP, AUP, OUP) Crystal n=368 n=351 n=378 n=362 n=363 n=326 n=367 n=366 n=362 n=350 n=363 n=361 n=363 zentrale Very important Bedeutung to my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich wird Is used für meinem my area Tätigkeitsbereich next to other methods neben anderen Methoden genutzt geringe Low importance Bedeutung in my für area meinem Tätigkeitsbereich keine Not relevant Bedeutung in my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich No Keine statement Angabe 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% und Selective ) 40

41 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (3/12) Consistently agile users How important are the following methods for your area? Scrum n=96 Kanban ("IT-Kanban") Extreme Programming (XP)(inkl. Test Driven Development) Feature Driven Development n=93 n=96 n=93 Very zentrale important Bedeutung to my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich Is wird used für meinem my area Tätigkeitsbereich next to other methods neben anderen Methoden genutzt geringe Low importance Bedeutung in my für area meinem Tätigkeitsbereich keine Not relevant Bedeutung in my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich Lean n=95 Keine No statement Angabe Design Thinking n=83 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% (Responses from the category Consistently agile ) 41

42 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (4/12) Hybrid users How important are the following methods for your area? Scrum n=156 Kanban ("IT-Kanban") Extreme Programming (XP)(inkl. incl. Test Driven Development) Feature Driven Development Lean n=147 n=158 n=157 n=154 zentrale Very important Bedeutung to my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich wird Is used für meinem my area Tätigkeitsbereich next to other methods neben anderen Methoden genutzt Low geringe importance Bedeutung in my für area meinem Tätigkeitsbereich Not keine relevant Bedeutung in my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich Keine No statement Angabe Design Thinking n=140 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% (Responses from the category Hybrid ) 42

43 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (5/12) Selective users How important are the following methods for your area? Scrum n=116 Kanban ("IT-Kanban") Extreme Programming (XP)(inkl. incl. Test Driven Development) Feature Driven Development Lean n=111 n=116 n=112 n=114 zentrale Very important Bedeutung to my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich wird Is used für meinem my area Tätigkeitsbereich next to other methods neben anderen Methoden genutzt geringe Low importance Bedeutung in my für area meinem Tätigkeitsbereich keine Not relevant Bedeutung in my für area meinen Tätigkeitsbereich Keine No statement Angabe Design Thinking n=103 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% (Responses from the category Selective ) 43

44 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (6/12) Participants who rated Scrum Evaluate Scrum regarding the importance of this method for your own field durchgängig Consistently agile Hybrid Selektiv Selective 9% 4% 3% 48% 32% n = % 5% 1% 2% 1% 34% 91% Zentrale Very important Bedeutung to my area Very Zentrale important Bedeutung to my area Wird Is used neben in my anderen area next benutzt to other methods geringe Low importance Bedeutung in my area Not Keine relevant Bedeutung in my area Keine No statement Angabe n = % 53% Zentrale Very important Bedeutung to my area Is Wird used neben in my area next anderen to other benutzt methods Wird Is used neben in my area next to anderen other methods benutzt geringe Low importance Bedeutung in my area Keine Not relevant Bedeutung in my area Keine No statement Angabe n = 96 1% 12% 30% Low geringe importance in my area Bedeutung Not Keine relevant in my area Bedeutung 4% Keine No statement Angabe n =

45 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (7/12) Scrum users 100% Participants who rated Scrum as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods also rated the following methods with A or B 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 46% 42% 51% 38% 30% 20% 10% 25% 27% 3% 24% 13% 18% 11% 23% 0% Adaptive Software Development Agile Modeling Crystal Design Thinkink Dynamic System Development Method Extreme Feature Driven Programming Development (XP)(inkl. Test Driven Development) Kanban Lean Lean Startup Unified ProcessUsability Driven (incl. RUP, Development AUP, OUP) * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " n=318 (multiple (Mehrfachantworten choice) möglich) und Selective ) 45

46 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (8/12) Scrum users agile users by groups 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Participants who rated Scrum as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods also rated the following methods with A or B Durchgängig Consistently agile n=93 Hybrid n=129 Selektiv Selective n=96 0% Adaptive Software Development Agile Modeling Crystal Design Thinking Dynamic System Development Method Extreme Feature Driven Programming Development (XP)(inkl. Test Driven Development) Kanban Lean Lean Startup Unified ProcessUsability Driven (incl. RUP, Development AUP, OUP) * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " und Selective ) 46

47 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (9/12) Kanban users 100% 90% 80% 70% Participants who rated Kanban as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods also rated the following methods with A or B 87% 60% 50% 56% 49% 52% 40% 30% 27% 27% 26% 26% 28% 20% 10% 4% 11% 10% 0% Adaptive Software Development Agile Modeling Crystal Design Thinkink Dynamic System Development Method Extreme Feature Driven Programming Development (XP)(inkl. Test Driven Development) Lean Lean Startup Scrum Unified ProcessUsability Driven (incl. RUP, Development AUP, OUP) * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " n=187 (Mehrfachantworten (multiple choice) möglich) und Selective ) 47

48 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (10/12) Kanban users agile users by groups 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Participants who rated Kanban as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods also rated the following methods with A or B Durchgängig Consistently agile Agil n=60 Hybrid n=77 Selective Selektiv n=50 0% Adaptive Software Development Agile Modeling Crystal Design Thinking Dynamic System Development Method Extreme Feature Driven Programming Development (XP)(inkl. Test Driven Development) Lean Lean Startup Scrum Unified ProcessUsability Driven (incl. RUP, Development AUP, OUP) * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " und Selective ) 48

49 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (11/12) Design Thinking users 100% Participants who rated Design Thinking as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods also rated the following methods with A or B 90% 84% 80% 70% 63% 60% 50% 47% 46% 49% 54% 56% 48% 40% 30% 29% 31% 20% 10% 10% 14% 0% Adaptive Software Development Agile Modeling Crystal Dynamic System Development Method Extreme Feature Driven Programming Development (XP)(inkl. Test Driven Development) Kanban ("IT- Kanban") Lean Lean Startup Scrum Unified ProcessUsability Driven (incl. RUP, Development AUP, OUP) * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " n=90 (multiple (Mehrfachantworten choice) möglich) und Selective ) 49

50 Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field (12/12) Design Thinking users agile users by groups 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Participants who rated Design Thinking as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods also rated the following methods with A or B Durchgängig Consistently agile n=24 Hybrid n=42 Selektiv Selective n=24 0% Adaptive Software Development Agile Modeling Crystal Dynamic System Development Method Extreme Feature Driven Programming Development (XP)(inkl. Test Driven Development) Kanban ("IT- Kanban") Lean Lean Startup Scrum Unified ProcessUsability Driven (incl. RUP, Development AUP, OUP) * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " und Selective ) 50

51 Evaluation Of Agile Methods Back To Table Of Content 51

52 Evaluation Of Agile Methods Evaluation of entire practiced agile methods Evaluation Agile Modeling Evaluation Scrum Evaluation Usabilitiy Driven Development Evaluation Kanban Evaluation Lean Startup Evaluation Extreme Programming Evaluation Dynamic System Development Method Evaluation Feature Driven Development Evaluation Unified Process Evaluation Lean Evaluation Crystal Evaluation Design Thinking Evaluation Classic Project Management Evaluation Adaptive Software Development Comparison 52

53 Evaluation Of Agile Methods The participants were asked to evaluate the methods they named before as highly relevant for their field of activity. It is notable that Unified Process and classic project management were evaluated worst. On the other hand the evaluation of Scrum varies and is comparable to the data from The evaluation of the adherence to a schedule is evaluated as bad for all methods. Already in the 2012 study it has been noted that the applicability of adherence to schedules makes only limited sense for iterative methods like Scrum as the basic idea is to work in short cycles that are always determined in advance and the work contents are variable. Nevertheless i.e. for reasons of comparability - the question was asked again. 53

54 Evaluation Entire Practiced Agile Methods (1/4) All agile users Evaluation of the entire practiced agile methods based on the following criteria. Gesamte Leistungsfähigkeit Overall performance der of Methode method n=1403 Transparency Transparenz n=1396 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation n=1367 Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=1402 n=1399 n=1405 n=1402 Sehr very good gut Gut good not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung (single choice) Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=1407 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% The number of answers is larger than the number of respondents, because many participants evaluated more than one method (all methods rated A or B ). und Selective ) 54

55 Evaluation Entire Practiced Agile Methods (2/4) Consistently agile users Evaluation of the entire practiced agile methods based on the following criteria. Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=463 Transparency Transparenz n=464 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=429 very Sehr good gut n=465 good Gut not Ausreichend very good n=464 poor Mangelhaft no Keine experience Erfahrung n=467 (single choice) n=465 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=465 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% The number of answers is larger than the number of respondents of this category, because many participants evaluated more than one method (all methods rated A or B ). (Responses from the category Consistently agile ) 55

56 Evaluation Entire Practiced Agile Methods (3/4) Hybrid users Evaluation of the entire practiced agile methods based on the following criteria. Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=555 Transparency Transparenz n=550 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=555 very Sehr good gut n=551 good Gut not Ausreichend very good n=551 poor Mangelhaft no Keine experience Erfahrung n=554 (single choice) n=551 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=556 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% The number of answers is larger than the number of respondents of this category, because many participants evaluated more than one method (all methods rated A or B ). (Responses from the category Hybrid ) 56

57 Evaluation Entire Practiced Agile Methods (4/6) Selective users Evaluation of the entire practiced agile methods based on the following criteria. Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=394 Transparency Transparenz n=382 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=383 very Sehr good gut n=384 good Gut not Ausreichend very good n=384 poor Mangelhaft no Keine experience Erfahrung n=384 (single choice) n=383 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=386 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% The number of answers is larger than the number of respondents of this category, because many participants evaluated more than one method (all methods rated A or B ). (Responses from the category Selective ) 57

58 Evaluation Entire Practiced Agile Methods (5/6) All Groups Quality of results Teamwork Consistently Durchgängig agile n=465 Hybrid n=556 Selective Selektiv n=386 Consistently classic project Durchgängig management klassisch n=84 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor no Keine experience Erfahrung Employee motivation Consistently Durchgängig agile n=467 Hybrid n=554 Selective Selektiv n=384 Consistently classic project Durchgängig management klassisch n=83 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% very Sehr good gut good Gut Ausreichend not very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Adherence to schedule Consistently Durchgängig agile n=465 Hybrid n=551 Selective Selektiv n=383 Consistently classic project Durchgängig management klassisch n=84 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Sehr very good gut Gut good not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor Keine no experience Erfahrung Consistently Durchgängig agile n=464 Hybrid n=551 Selective Selektiv n=384 Consistently classic project Durchgängig management klassisch n=84 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Sehr very good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor Keine no experience Erfahrung The difference betweeen all agile groups / consistently classic and the goups consistently agile / consistently classic are significant for each criterion (chi-square-test: p<0,001). und Selective, Consistently classic project management ) 58

59 Evaluation Entire Practiced Agile Methods (6/6) All Groups Efficency Transparency Consistently Durchgängig agile n=465 Hybrid n=551 Selective Selektiv n=384 Consistently classic project Durchgängig management klassisch n=84 Consistently Durchgängig agile n=464 Hybrid n=550 Selective Selektiv n=382 Consistently classic project Durchgängig management klassisch n=84 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor no Keine experience Erfahrung 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% very Sehr good gut good Gut Ausreichend not very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Customer orientation Consistently Durchgängig agile n=463 Hybrid n=555 Selective Selektiv n=404 Consistently classic project Durchgängig management klassisch n=84 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Sehr very good gut Gut good not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor Keine no experience Erfahrung The difference betweeen all agile groups / consistently classic and the goups consistently agile / consistently classic are significant for each criterion (chi-square-test: p<0,001). und Selective, Consistently classic project management ) 59

60 Evaluation Scrum (1/2) All agile users Please evaluate Scrum with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=306 Transparency Transparenz n=305 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=306 n=306 n=306 n=308 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft no Keine experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=306 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=306 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion und Selective ) 60

61 Evaluation Scrum (2/2) Comparison 2012/2014 Please evaluate Scrum with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company (2012). Gesamte Leistungsfähigkeit Overall performance of method der Methode Transparency Transparenz n=90 n=90 Please evaluate Scrum with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company (2014). Overall Gesamte performance Leistungsfähigkeit of method der Methode Transparency Transparenz n=306 n=305 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation n=90 Efficency Effizienz n=90 Adherence Termintreue to schedule n=90 Teamwork n=90 Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=90 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=90 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Customer Kundenorientierung orientation n=306 Effizienz Efficency n=306 Termintreue Adherence to schedule n=306 Teamwork Teamwork n=308 Mitarbeitermotivation Employee motivation n=306 Ergebnisqualität Quality of results n=306 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft no Keine experience Erfahrung Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor Keine no experience Erfahrung und Selective ) 61

62 Evaluation Kanban All agile users Please evaluate Kanban with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=174 Transparency Transparenz n=171 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=173 n=173 n=172 n=173 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=173 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=173 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 62

63 Evaluation Extreme Programming All agile users Please evaluate Extreme Programming (incl. Test Driven Development and Pair Programming) with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method Transparency Transparenz n=162 n=160 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Employee Mitarbeitermotivation Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=161 n=163 n=161 n=163 n=163 n=162 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good Mangelhaft poor Keine no experience Erfahrung Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 63

64 Evaluation Feature Driven Development All agile users Please evaluate Feature Driven Development with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=142 Transparency Transparenz n=143 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=143 n=141 n=140 n=142 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=143 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=143 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 64

65 Evaluation Lean All agile users Please evaluate Lean with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=123 Transparency Transparenz n=122 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=122 n=121 n=123 n=121 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=122 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=122 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 65

66 Evaluation Design Thinking All agile users Please evaluate Design Thinking with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=80 Transparency Transparenz n=80 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=80 n=80 n=80 n=80 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=79 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=80 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 66

67 Evaluation Adaptive Software Development All agile users Please evaluate Adaptive Software Development with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=90 Transparency Transparenz n=91 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=69 n=91 n=91 n=91 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=92 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=92 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 67

68 Evaluation Agile Modeling All agile users Please evaluate Agile Modeling with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=90 Transparency Transparenz n=91 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=91 n=91 n=91 n=91 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=92 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=92 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 68

69 Evaluation Usabilitiy Driven Development All agile users Please evaluate Usability Driven Development with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=82 Transparency Transparenz n=82 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=83 n=83 n=83 n=80 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=80 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=83 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 69

70 Evaluation Lean Startup All agile users Please evaluate Lean Startup with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=59 Transparency Transparenz n=58 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=46 n=59 n=59 n=59 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=58 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=59 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 70

71 Evaluation Dynamic System Development Method All agile users Please evaluate Dynamic System Development Method with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=42 Transparency Transparenz n=42 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=42 n=42 n=41 n=42 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=42 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=42 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 71

72 Evaluation Unified Process All agile users Please evaluate Unified Process (incl. RUP,AUP, OUP) with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=40 Transparency Transparenz n=40 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=39 n=40 n=40 n=40 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=40 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=40 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 72

73 Evaluation Crystal All agile users Please evaluate Crystal with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=12 Transparency Transparenz n=12 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork n=12 n=12 n=12 n=12 very Sehr good gut good Gut not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=12 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=12 Participants who rated method as follows: A = very important to my area or B = is used in my area next to other methods Single choice for each success criterion 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 73

74 Evaluation Classic Project Management (1/3) All groups Please evaluate classic project management with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Transparency Transparenz n=454 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation n=450 Effizienz Efficency Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Mitarbeitermotivation Employee n=451 very Sehr good gut good Gut n=452 not Ausreichend very good poor Mangelhaft n=451 Keine no experience Erfahrung (single choice) n=455 Ergebnisqualität Quality of results n=455 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective, Consistently classic project management ) 74

75 Evaluation Classic Project Management (2/3) All agile users Please evaluate classic project management with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Gesamte Overall Leistungsfähigkeit performance der of Methode method n=370 Transparency Transparenz n=370 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Efficency Effizienz Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Employee Mitarbeitermotivation n=366 very Sehr good gut n=367 good Gut not Ausreichend very good n=368 poor Mangelhaft Keine no experience Erfahrung n=368 (single choice) n=371 Quality Ergebnisqualität of results n=371 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% und Selective ) 75

76 Evaluation Classic Project Management (3/3) Users of consistently classic project management methods Please evaluate classic project management with the characteristics stated below according to your experiences in your area of the company Budgeteinhaltung compliance n=84 Transparenz Transparency n=84 Customer Kundenorientierung orientation Effizienz Efficency Adherence Termintreue to schedule Teamwork Mitarbeitermotivation Employee n=84 n=84 n=84 n=83 n=84 very Sehr good gut Gut good Ausreichend not very good Mangelhaft poor Keine no experience Erfahrung (single choice) Ergebnisqualität Quality of results n=84 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% (Responses from the categories Consistently classic project management ) 76

77 Evaluation Comparison Summary all groups 100% Sum of the "very good and "good ratings 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Scrum Kanban Extreme Programming Feature Driven Develpment Lean Design Thinking Classic Klassisches Project Projektmanagement Management 0% n: see individual evaluations und Selective, Consistently classic project management ) 77

78 Forms Of Usage Of Agile Methods Back To Table Of Content 78

79 Forms Of Usage Of Agile Methods Utilization of agile techniques Utilization of agile techniques - Scrum Utilization of agile techniques - Kanban Utilization of agile techniques Design Thinking Other techniques Size of the team 79

80 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (1/9) It is apparent that the practitioners of agile methods in this study especially Scrum techniques. Six of the seven most often chosen techniques are from Scrum. The Impediment Backlog is the only typical Scrum technique that isn t used that often. The comparison shows that consistently agile users, use most of the techniques. More than 70% of the consistently agile users choose 15 of the 22 stated techniques (without others ). On the following pages it is shown which techniques the participants, who said that Scrum, Kanban or Design Thinking has a high relevance for the own field of activity, use. For interpretation it is important to know that multiple answers were possible. Not surprisingly for Kanban-users the usage of Kanban-Boards is high (84%). It is notable that only few users of Design Thinking work with Personas (35%). 80

81 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (2/9) All agile users 100% 90% 89% Which agile methods do you use? 80% 81% 80% 79% 78% 74% 70% 70% 69% 66% 65% 64% 60% 60% 58% 57% 54% 50% 49% 45% 43% 40% 30% 28% 20% 19% 17% 13% 10% 10% 0% n=386 (multiple (Mehrfachantworten choice) möglich) und Selective ) 81

82 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (3/9) Agile users by groups 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Which agile methods do you use? Durchgängig Consistently agile n=100 Hybrid n=165 Selektiv Selective n=121 n = Number of participants who tagged at least one technique und Selective ) 82

83 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (4/9) Scrum-Users Only Participants who rated Scrum as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods 100% 90% 94% 86% 86% 85% 86% Which agile methods do you use? 80% 80% 75% 76% 70% 70% 73% 72% 68% 64% 60% 60% 57% 54% 49% 50% 40% 30% 44% 29% 20% 10% 0% 21% 18% 13% 10% * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " n=318 (Mehrfachantworten (multiple choice) möglich) und Selective ) 83

84 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (5/9) Scrum-Users Only Participants who rated Scrum as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods Which agile methods do you use? Durchgängig Consistently agile n=93 n=24 Hybrid n=129 n=42 Selektiv Selective n=96 n=24 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " n =Number of participants who tagged at least one technique und Selective ) 84

85 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (6/9) Kanban-Users Only Participants who rated Kanban as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods 100% Which agile methods do you use? 90% 91% 88% 87% 83% 83% 83% 84% 80% 70% 60% 50% 71% 76% 69% 70% 73% 72% 65% 65% 61% 52% 56% 40% 36% 30% 25% 28% 20% 20% 10% 13% 0% * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " n=186 (multiple (Mehrfachantworten choice) möglich) und Selective ) 85

86 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (7/9) Kanban-Users Only Participants who rated Kanban as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods Which agile methods do you use? Durchgängig Consistently agile n=60 n=24 Hybrid n=76 n=42 Selektiv Selective n=50 n=24 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% n = Number of participants who tagged at least one technique und Selective ) 86

87 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (8/9) DesignThinking-Users Only Participants who rated Design Thinking as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 87% 88% 80% 79% 78% 74% 71% 74% Which agile methods do you use? 64% 65% 70% 62% 60% 60% 58% 60% 50% 45% 45% 40% 30% 20% 35% 28% 16% 21% 21% 10% 0% n=92 (Mehrfachantworten (multiple choice) möglich) und Selective ) 87

88 Utilization Of Agile Techniques (9/9) DesignThinking-Users Only Participants who rated Design Thinking as follows:* A = very important to my area B = is used in my area next to other methods 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Which agile methods do you use? Durchgängig Consistently agile n=24 Hybrid n=42 Selektiv Selective n=24 * Compare: " Importance Of Agile Methods For The Own Field " n = Number of participants who tagged at least one technique und Selective ) 88

89 Other Techniques Which Are Also Important For The Participants und Selective ) 89