運用限制理論探討軟體開發組織進行敏捷轉型之研究—以某軟體服務公司為例

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：17

、訪客IP：18.219.236.62

姓名

謝禎錕(Chen-Kun Hsieh) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊管理學系在職專班

論文名稱

運用限制理論探討軟體開發組織進行敏捷轉型之研究—以某軟體服務公司為例
(Using Theory of Constraints to Discuss the Software Development Organization to Execute the Agile Transition Process – For Software Service Company)

相關論文

★ 專案管理的溝通關鍵路徑探討─以某企業軟體專案為例	★ 運用並探討會議流如何促進敏捷發展過程中團隊溝通與文件化：以T銀行系統開發為例
★ 專案化資訊服務中人力連續派遣決策模式之研究─以高鐵行控資訊設備維護為例	★ 以組織正義觀點介入案件指派決策之研究
★ 應用協調理論建立系統軟體測試中問題改善之協作流程	★ 應用案例式推理於問題管理系統之研究 -以筆記型電腦產品為例
★ 運用限制理論於多專案開發模式的人力資源配置之探討	★ 應用會議流方法於軟體專案開發之個案研究：以翰昇科技公司為例
★ 多重專案、多期再規劃的軟體開發接案決策模式：以南亞科技資訊部門為例	★ 會議導向敏捷軟體開發及系統設計：以大學畢業專題為例
★ 一種基於物件、屬性導向之變更影響分析方法於差異化產品設計	★ 會議流方法對大學畢業專題的團隊合作品質影響之實驗研究
★ 實施敏捷式發展法於大學部畢業專題之行動研究 – 以中央大學資管系為例	★ 建立一個用來評核自然語言需求品質的線上資訊系統
★ 結合本體論與模糊分析網路程序法於軟體測試之風險與風險關聯辨識	★ 在軟體反向工程中針對UML結構模型圖之線上品質評核系統

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

敏捷軟體開發(Agile Software Development)模式在近年來受到學界與軟體開發人員之間的廣泛討論，許多的軟體開發業者都期望其軟體開發團隊能夠從原有的軟體開發模式轉換成敏捷軟體開發模式，這樣的轉換過程被稱為敏捷轉型過程 (Agile Transition Process, ATP)。由於敏捷轉型過程並沒有標準或眾所周知的模型或框架，許多組織在進行這樣的轉型過程中往往面臨許多障礙、問題和挑戰。
本研究認為限制理論 (Theory of Constraints, TOC) 其強調打破流程限制、持續改進、改善組織績效的主張，或可協助軟體開發組織在執行敏捷轉型過程時檢視其過程中的限制與障礙，並且發展出適切之轉型歷程以協助組織成功地達成敏捷轉型之目標。故本研究以個案研究的方式，運用限制理論的思考流程框架，彙整個案公司在進行敏捷轉型過程中發生的不良效應，檢視敏捷轉型過程所面對的流程、人員、管理、文化、技術轉換過程中所發生的問題，並以思考流程的五種分析工具，針對不同的問題進行分析，找出適合的實務做法，以協助個案組織順利轉型至敏捷軟體開發模式。透過本研究過程，個案組織透過此轉換模式有效地改善其轉型問題，逐漸演變成具備能夠自我決策的敏捷軟體開發組織；本研究同時也透過限制理論的思考流程框架，建立出一套可供持續發展的敏捷轉型之轉換模式。

摘要(英)

Agile software development model has been widely discussed among academics and software developers in recent years. Many software development enterprises expect their teams to transform their software development models from legacy to agile. This transformation process is called Agile Transition Process (ATP). Since ATP has no standard, recognized model, or framework, many organizations often face obstacles, problems, and challenges.
This research believes the Theory of Constraints (TOC), which aims to break flow constraints, can provide ongoing improvement, and to improve organizational performance, to help software development enterprises review their process limitations and obstacles, and eventually evolve appropriated transition models to achieve successful agile transitions. Therefore, through case studies, this research uses the thinking process framework of the theory of constraints to aggregate the undesirable effects occurred during the agile transition process of the case-study enterprises and inspects issues encountered in processes, personnel, management, culture, and technology transitions. This research then employs five thinking process tools to analyze issues respectively and finds the appropriate substantive approaches to assist enterprises to achieve painless agile transformations. Through this research process, the case-study enterprises effectively mitigated issues in agile transformations, and they were evolving to agile software development enterprises capable of self-determination. Via those case studies, this research can be a supportive model based on Thinking Process of Theory of Constraints for any software development organization hesitant to transform its development model from legacy to agile.

關鍵字(中)

★ 敏捷轉型
★ 軟體開發模式
★ 限制理論

關鍵字(英)

★ Agile Transition Process
★ Software Development Process
★ Theory of Constraints

論文目次

第一章緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2 研究目的 2
1.3 研究流程 3
第二章文獻探討 5
2.1 敏捷軟體開發模式與傳統軟體開發模式之比較 5
2.2 敏捷轉型過程 11
2.3 限制理論 13
2.3.1 限制理論簡介 13
2.3.2 限制理論的思考流程 15
第三章研究方法 24
3.1 研究問題之定義與範圍 24
3.2 研究方法 25
3.2.1 質性研究 25
3.2.2 個案研究法 26
3.2.3 資料收集方法 28
3.3 研究架構 29
第四章個案分析 31
4.1 個案介紹 31
4.1.1 個案公司介紹 31
4.1.2 個案背景描述 32
4.2 引用限制理論之改善過程 39
4.2.1 要改變什麼 39
4.2.2 要改變成什麼 50
4.2.3 如何造成改變 58
4.3 行動準則中所採用的敏捷實務 65
4.4 個案小結 70
第五章研究結果 72
5.1 關鍵績效指標 72
5.1.1 關鍵績效指標之定義 72
5.1.2 結果與分析 74
5.2 訪談與分析 76
5.2.1 訪談程序 76
5.2.2 問題與結果 77
5.3 研究限制 83
第六章結論與建議 84
6.1 研究結論 84
6.2 研究建議 85
參考文獻 87

參考文獻

【英文部份】
1. Alliance, Agile. (2001). The agile manifesto.
2. Abdelnour-Nocera, J., Sharp, H., 2012. “Understanding conflicts in agile adoption through technological frames.” Int. J. Sociotechnol. Knowl. Dev. 4, 29–45.
3. Beck, K., (2003), “Test-driven development: by example”, Addison-Wesley Professional.
4. Beck, K. and Andrews, C. (2005), “Extreme Programming Explained”, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ
5. Blankenship, J., Bussa, M., Millett, S. (2011), “Pro Agile .NET Development with Scrum”, Apress.
6. Carvalho, F. and Azevedo, L.G. (2013), “Service Agile Development Using XP, Service Oriented System Engineering (SOSE)”, 2013 IEEE 7th International Symposium on IEEE, 254-259.
7. Cohn, M., (2009), “Succeeding with agile: software development using Scrum”, Pearson Education.
8. Cooper, D. R. and Emory, C. W., (1996), Business Research Methods, Chicago: Irwin, Inc. 5th Ed.
9. Dahmann, J, Gregorio, D, Modigliani, P (2013), “Systems engineering processes for agile software development”, Systems Conference (SysCon), 2013 IEEE International, 351-355
10. Denning, S., (2012),"How Agile can transform manufacturing: the case of Wikispeed", Strategy & Leadership, 40(6), 22 – 28.
11. Deshpande, S.,Bolinger, J.,Lynch, T.D,Herold, M.,Ramnath, R.,Ramanathan, J.(2011) “Teaching students software engineering practices for micro-teams”, Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2011
12. Dettmer, H. W., (1997) Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints – A System Approach to Continuous Improvement. ASQC Quality Press,
13. Dettmer, H. W., (2000), Constraints Management, Quality America Inc.
14. Fogelström, N.D., Gorschek, T., Svahnberg, M., Olsson, P.,(2010), “The Impact of Agile Principles on Market-Driven Software Product Development”, Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice, 22, 53-80
15. Gandomani, T.J., Zulzalil, H., Ghani, A.A.A., Sultan, A.M., Nafchi, M.Z., 2013. “Obstacles to moving to agile software development: at a glance.” J. Comput. Sci. 9, 620–625.
16. Gandomani,T. J.,Zulzalil, H., Ghani, A.A.A., Sultan, A. B. M., Sharif, K. Y.(2014) "Exploring Facilitators of Transition and Adoption to Agile Methods: A Grounded Theory Study", Jounal of Software, 9(7), 1666-1678
17. Gandomani,T. J.,Zulzalil, H., Ghani, A.A.A., Sultan, A. B. M., Sharif, K. Y.(2014) “How Human Aspects Impress Agile Software Development Transition and Adoption”, International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications, 8(1), 129-148.
18. Gandomani, T. J., Nafchi, M. Z. (2015), "Identifying some important success factors in adopting agile software development practices " Journal of Systems and Software, 107, 204–219.
19. Ganesh, N., Thangasamy, S., (2012). “Lessons learned in transforming from traditional to agile development.” J. Comput. Sci. 8, 389–392.
20. Goldratt, E. M. and Cox, J., (1984), The Goal - A Process of Ongoing Improvement, NorthRiver Press, Croton-on-Hudson, New York.
21. Goldratt, E. M., (1990), The Haystack Syndrome: Sifting Information Out of the Data Ocean, The North River Press, Croton-on-Hudson, New York.
22. Goldratt, E. M., (1994), It’s Not Luck, North River Press, Great Barrington, MA.
23. Goldratt, E. M., (1997), Critical Chain, North River Press, Great Barrington, MA.
24. Highsmith, J. and Cockburn, A., (2001), “Agile software development: the business of innovation”, Computer 34(9), 120-127.
25. Leau, Y.B., Loo, W.K., Tham, W.Y., Tan, S.F. (2012) “Software Development Life Cycle AGILE vs Traditional Approaches”, 2012 International Conference on Information and Network Technology, 162-167.
26. Modi, S. and Abbott, P. (2013), “Understanding Collaborative Practices in Distribute Agile Development”, 2013 IEEE 8th International Conference on Global Software Engineering Workshops, 74-77.
27. Nerur, S., Mahapatra, R., Mangalaraj, G. (2005) “Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies”, Communications of the ACM, 48(5), 72-78.
28. Nikiforova, O., Nikulsins, V., Sukovskis, U. (2009) “Integration of MDA Framework into the Model of Traditional Software Development.”, Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Databases and Information Systems V, vol. 187, IOS Press, Amsterdam, 229–239.
29. Noreen, E., Smith, D. and Mackey, J., (1995), “The Theory of Constraints and Its Implication for Management Accounting”, North River Press, MA.
30. Peterson, K. (2009) “A Comparison of Issues and Advantages in Agile and Incremental Development between State of the Art and an Industrial Case.” Journal of System and Software.
31. Pikkarainen, M., Salo, O., Kuusela, R., Abrahamsson, P. (2012). “Strengths and barriers behind the successful agile deployment-insights from the three software intensive companies” Finland. Emp. Softw. Eng. 17, 675–702.
32. Poppendieck, M., Poppendieck, T.,(2010), “Implementing lean software development: from concept to cash”, Pearson Education.
33. Rahman, S. (1998), “Theory of Constraints a Review of The Philosophy and Its Applications,” International Journal of Operations and Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp.336-55.
34. Rico, D. F. (2008), “What is the ROI of Agile vs. Traditional Methods? An analysis of XP, TDD, Pair Programming, and Scrum.” Tick IT International Journal.
35. Sander, B. (2014), “Challenges in the Transition from Waterfall to Scrum–a Case study at Port Base.” 20th Twente Student Conference on Information Technology.
36. Schova, Z., (2010). “Hidden gap in agile methods adoption. In: Proceeding of 9th International Conference on New Trends” , Software Methodologies, Tools and Techniques, SoMeT_10, IOS Press, 346–356.
37. Schwaber, K. and Sutherland, J., 2011, “The scrum guide”, Scrum Alliance.
38. Saxena, P., Kaushik, M. (2013), “Software Development: Techniques and Methodologies”, International Journal of Software & Hardware Research in Engineering 1(3), 48-52.
39. Srinivasan, J., Lundqvist, K., 2010. “Agile in India: Challenges and lessons learned. “, Proceeding of 3rd India Software Engineering Conference, ISEC’10. ACM, 125 - 130.
40. Sohaib, O. and Khan, K. (2010), “Integrating usability engineering and agile software development : A literature review.”, 2010 International Conference on Computer Design And Applicatons (ICCDA 2010), Volume 2, 32-38.
41. Tolfo, C., Wazlawick, R.S., Ferreira, M.G.G., Forcellini, F.A., 2011. “Agile methods and organizational culture: reflections about cultural levels.”, J. Softw. Main. Evol. 23, 423–441.
42. Umble, M., Umble, E. and Deylen, L. V. (2001), “Integrating Enterprise Resources Planning and Theory of Constraints: A Case Study.”, Production & Inventory Management Journal, Vol. 42, No. 2, pp.43-48.
43. Van Wyngaard C.J., Pretorius J. H. C., Pretorius J. (2012), “Theory of the triple constraint — A conceptual review”, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 1991-1997
44. Wysockki, R.K. (2013), “Effective Project Management – Traditional, Agile, Extreme – Seventh Edition.”, Willity.
45. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. Youngman, K.J. (2003), A Guide to Implementing the Theory of Constraints (TOC), , (Access 2016/03/29).

【中文部份】
1. 黃耀寬(2009)，運用限制理論之思考流程探討數位學習資源整合－以公部門數位學習網站為例，國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士班論文。
2. 鈕文英(1999)，自然探究法之理論與方法分析，高雄師大學報，第 10 期，頁 61-83，國立高雄師範大學。

指導教授

陳仲儼(Chung-Yang Chen)

審核日期

2016-6-7

推文