See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/379096213

Software Metrics in Agile Software Development: A Review Report

Preprint · March 2024

DOI: 10.36227/techrxiv.171084962.20068546/v1

CITATIONS READS
0 638

1 author:

Faizan Berlas
Virtual University of Pakistan
6 PUBLICATIONS 1 CITATION

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Faizan Berlas on 26 March 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Software Metrics in Agile Software Development: A
Review Report
Muhammad Faizan Berlas
Department of Computer Science
Virtual University of Pakistan
Lahore, Pakistan
mfaizan.berlas@gmail.com

Abstract—Modern software systems intensively use the Agile to work iteratively and deliver software products as per
software development processes for their development and customers' requirements. Delivery strategy, Agile software
maintenance. The Agile development methodology encourages engineering techniques, and Agile team capability are the
customer satisfaction, early incremental delivery, and overall success factors in Agile software development projects [6].
development simplicity. Agile development methods accept Software industry practitioners report several benefits of the
changes in requirements and technology and use a more Agile framework. Among these, the three most valuable
adaptive or iterative approach to planning. With the adaptation benefits are reduced time-to-market, increased customer
of Agile process models in the development of modern software
satisfaction, and reduced development costs [7]. Managing
systems, there is a need for continuous improvement in the Agile
and implementing the agile framework can be challenging in
processes. Agile development processes are modified and
upgraded by utilizing software metrics. There are several
both large-scale software projects [3] and Small and Medium
proposed software metrics for measuring performance and Enterprises (SMEs) [7]. Several proposed software metrics are
quality in Agile software development. These include customer available for measuring the performance of Agile software
satisfaction, story point estimation, velocity, test coverage, development processes [2]-[20]. As highlighted by [3] and [7],
defects in production, and other metrics. Each software metric managing the Agile processes requires continuous
has its own merits and demerits. This research aims to provide monitoring, and software metrics measure and monitor the
a comprehensive review of published research work on software performance of Agile software development processes.
metrics. Specifically, it summarizes the software metrics used
In Agile Software Development (ASD), the software is
for measuring the performance of Agile process models. This
research paper will help understand the usefulness of various developed incrementally in small iterations, and the
software metrics used in Agile development, and it will serve as customers' input is the main driver for each iteration [8]. For
a foundation for future research in software metrics for Agile each customer request, the development team estimates the
software development. size and effort required to complete the request [8]. The
quantifying of size and effort needed to complete a task is
Keywords—Agile Software Development, Software Metrics, called the effort estimation metric. In ASD, Effort estimation
Software Processes. is an integral part of the software management process [8].
Companies with various teams working in geographically
I. INTRODUCTION dispersed locations or different time zones use geographically
A software metric is a measurable or countable distributed agile development (GDAD) methodology [9].
characteristic or attribute of software [1]. The organizations These companies face several challenges, such as
plan their work items, measure their productivity, and estimate communication issues, cultural differences, and coordination
the quality and progress of their software development and commitment problems [9]. According to [21], adaptive
activities by utilizing software metrics [1]. There are two types enterprise architecture (AEA) management can decrease the
of software metrics: Process metrics and Product metrics. effect of these challenges by providing a common ground that
Process metrics measure the performance of the software keeps all distributed teams on track.
development process. This category includes cost, scope, Quantifying software quality in Agile software
time, customer satisfaction, and other metrics used for development involves the measurement of several quality
quantifying the attributes of the software development attributes. [10] identified the quantification of six attributes for
process. Product metrics measure the quality, size, and measuring software quality in the Agile framework. Selecting
performance of software products. This category consists of the type of software metrics that best suits the needs of a
reliability, portability, efficiency, and other metrics used for particular organization for measuring its Agile development
measuring the characteristics of the software product [1]. process can be challenging. [11] presented a systematic
Modern software development projects use Agile software mapping study of the Agile software development process
development processes because they enable on-time delivery metrics and classified three categories for Global Software
of high-quality software within the allocated budget [2]. Development (GSD). Scrum is an Agile project management
Large-scale software development projects also utilize Agile framework that helps teams structure and manage their work
practices to develop their software systems [3]. Agile methods through values, principles, and practices [12]. It is a flexible
in large-scale software development projects require and iterative framework that guides teams to collaborate and
continuous monitoring and scaling [3]. Organizations working adapt to changing requirements, deliver value incrementally,
on large-scale projects use software metrics to improve and and improve quality and productivity [12]. The work of [12]
scale Agile development methodologies [4]. provides valuable insights into the quantification of Scrum
With the advancement of technology, companies are Metrics and shows that Scrum Metrics are critical for
becoming more dependent on software solutions for their day- achieving strong project dynamics and optimal results.
to-day business operations [5]. Software solutions must be Empirical process control in Agile software development
flexible and adaptable to meet the growing needs of the is the steering and readjusting of the Agile development
business. Agile methodologies enable the development teams processes with the help of emergent and experimental process
data [22]. This concept implies that Agile process TABLE I. RELATED WORK IN SOFTWARE METRICS.
development shall not follow rigid and static processes or
project plans and shall be adjustable according to the process Proposed
Paper Year Research Area
Approach
metrics data [22]. According to [13], the effectiveness of
empirical process control metrics is unclear, and empirical Software metrics in
evidence of their successful impact is rare. [13] develop an Concas et al. [20] 2012 Empirical study
Agile project
artifact that facilitates the implementation of control metrics Agile in large-scale
in large-scale Agile development projects. [14] presents a Heidenberg et al.
2013 software Metrics model
[19]
survey and interview-based analysis from 24 companies and development
identifies ten metrics beneficial to the ASD process. [15] Destefanis et al. Software Metrics in
conducted multiple case studies and identified data 2014 Empirical study
[18] Agile
availability and development process as the two fundamental
success factors for process metric operationalization. Usman et al. [8] 2014
Effort estimation in Systematic
Harmonized delivery and sustainability metrics systems play ASD literature review
a pivotal role in enhancing the sustainability and efficiency of Software Metrics in
Survey and
the software development process [16]. [17] conducted a Padmini et al. [14] 2015 interview-based
ASD
quasi-experimental study and compared the Scrum process analysis
with the integrated Scrum Model-Based System Architecture Ram et al. [15] 2019
Process metrics in
Case study
Process (sMBSAP). According to the results of [17], the Agile
quantitative benefits of sMBSAP are far more than the Scrum Scrum development
Dixit and Bhushan
process. [18] conducted an empirical study on eight object- [12]
2019 process and Scrum Survey report
oriented systems and analyzed the distribution of software metrics
metrics in Agile and plan-driven methodologies. [19] presents Agile processes in
Choraś et al. [7] 2020 small-size Case study
a Metrics model to measure the impact of an Agile companies
transformation in large software development organizations. Agile software
Kandengwa and
[20] also conducted an empirical study to assess the impact of 2021 project Survey report
Khoza [2]
software metrics in Agile projects. measurement
Charles and Measuring Software
This paper aims to provide a comprehensive literature 2021 Empirical study
Caesar [10] Quality in Agile
review of published empirical studies, research work, and
systematic literature reviews on software metrics in Agile Software Process Systematic
Hossain et al. [11] 2021
software development. The rest of the paper presents sections Metrics in ASD literature review
II, III, and IV. Section II highlights the related research work
on software metrics in Agile software development. It also Alzoubi and Gill Software metrics in
2022 Empirical study
[9] GDAD
shows the methodology for selecting the research work for the
literature review. Section III is the discussion section, and it Empirical Control
postulates the research questions, the answers of which help Roeck et al. [13] 2022 Empirical study
Metrics in ASD
in elaborating and understanding the published research in the
context of software metrics in Agile development. Section IV Software metrics in
Phillipp et al. [3] 2022 Survey report
summarizes the findings of this research work, followed by its large-scale ASD
limitations and ideas for future research. Software metrics in
Phillipp et al. [4] 2022 Metrics model
large-scale ASD
II. RELATED WORK
One of the main steps in conducting a comprehensive Sprint length
Sharma et al. [6] 2023 Case study
estimation in ASD
literature review is to devise a query string of relevant
keywords to find the required research papers [23]. The Quality
keywords of the query string used for finding the relevant Barraood et al. [5] 2023 Measurement in Survey report
ASD
literature were Software Metrics, Software Product Metrics, ASD metrics
Software Process Metrics, Software Development Metrics, Huss et al. [17] 2023 measurement in Empirical study
Agile Software Development, Agile Metrics, and Agile sMBSAP
Methodologies. This query string searched the relevant Fagarasan et al. Sustainability
research publications from reputable online research 2023 Metrics model
[16] metrics in ASD
databases. Another criterion for selecting research
publications was to pick research papers from journals or
conferences indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded III. DISCUSSION
(SCIE), Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI), Scopus, or
Google Scholar. The exclusion criteria from selection was to This section provides the findings of the research work
exclude all research publications not written in English. Also, selected for the literature review. The research questions
exclude all research papers that are under peer review. define the research objectives and attempt to determine the
software metrics used in ASD. The answers to these questions
Based on the selection criteria, 19 research papers were give a descriptive overview of various software metrics used
selected for the literature review. Table I shows the list of in ASD and identify the reasons for their adaptation. These
these research papers and presents them in ascending order by answers also determine the challenges of implementing
the year of publication. Table I also shows the research area software metrics in ASD.
and proposed research approach for each research paper.
A. RQ1: What are the most commonly used software  Team morale improvement
metrics in Agile software development?
 Project risk reduction
The answer to this question seeks to determine the most
widely used software metrics in ASD. Traditionally, software  Software quality improvement
development companies considered scope, budget, and
 Ability to manage changing priorities
timeline the most critical software metrics for measuring the
performance of the software project [2]. According to [2],  Improvement in the Engineering discipline
these triple constraints - scope, budget, and time are not
suitable for measuring the performance of ASD. [2] collected  Improvement in business and IT alignment
data through a survey and found that organizations are  Improvement in delivery speed and time to market
adopting business value delivered and customer satisfaction
metrics for measuring the performance of ASD. The survey  Increased team productivity
respondents were professionals and practitioners working in
According to [2], the principal challenges of adopting
Agile projects, and it had the following five sections.
ASD are:
 Biographic information
 General organization resistance to change
 Metrics used to measure ASD
 Inconsistent processes and practices across the teams
 Reasons for adopting metrics in ASD
 The pervasiveness of traditional development
 Benefits of adopting metrics in ASD methods
 Challenges of adopting metrics in ASD  Insufficient training and education
Specifically, the survey respondents were scrum masters,  Lack of business, customer, and product owner
product owners, Agile coaches, team members, stakeholders, availability
and end users. To measure project success, 69% of
respondents use the business value delivered metric success,  Fragmented tooling and project-related data and
66% use the project visibility metric, and 60% use the management
customer satisfaction metric. Table II shows the types of  Organization culture
software metrics, their usage, and measurement tools defined
by [2].  Minimal collaboration and knowledge sharing
The main advantages of ASD highlighted by [2] are as  Lack of skills and experience with Agile methods
follows.
 Inadequate management support and sponsorship
 Better project visibility
 Company philosophy at odds with core Agile values
 Better project predictability
TABLE II. SOFTWARE METRICS, THEIR USAGE, AND MEASUREMENT TOOLS IN ASD BY KANDENGWA AND KHOZA [2].

Software Metrics Usage in ASD Measurement Tools

Customer satisfaction Measures the outcome of customer satisfaction. Customer feedback, Net promoter score

Business value delivered Helps the product managers to link their products with their business value. Customer feedback

Helps in measuring customer expectations regarding the timely delivery of the

On-time delivery Burn-down charts, Burn-up charts
product.

Quality Measures the conformance of the project with the quality standards Number of defects

Productivity Helps managers to understand how much the team is delivering. Burn-up charts

Measures the amount of work the team has to perform to complete all the planned
Predictability Velocity trend charts
work for the successful delivery of the product.

Helps the project managers understand how the proposed adjustments are
Process improvement Cumulative flow charts
impacting productivity.

Project visibility Helps in sharing project updates and progress with all stakeholders. Dependency charts

Helps the project manager and their teams to set and accomplish goals over a
Project scope Burn-down charts, Kanban boards
specific period.

Helps the project manager to compare the budget with the actual cost of the project Cumulative flow charts, Dependency
Budget versus actual cost
and forecast revenues and expenses. charts
 Modern software organizations face rapidly TABLE III. SOFTWARE METRICS, THEIR DESCRIPTION, AND
changing technology, markets, regulations, and other ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL.
challenges [3]. Since traditional software development Software Organizational
methodologies cannot resolve these challenges, organizations Description
Metrics Level
adopt ASD methodologies and processes [3]. ASD has been
exceptionally successful in small-scale organizations [4], and Story point Measures the outcome of customer
Team
estimation satisfaction.
because of its proven track record, large-scale organizations
are also adopting it. However, implementing ASD in large- Helps the product managers to link
scale software systems is complicated [3] and involves Velocity their products with their business Team
continuous monitoring. [3] interviewed Agile Coaches, Scrum value.
Masters, Product Owners, Managers, Developers, Software Sprint burn-
Helps in measuring customer
Architects, Solution Architects, Business Analysts, and expectations regarding the timely Program
down
Release Train Engineers from 11 different organizations. The delivery of the product.
primary objective of these interviews was to determine the Defects in Measures the conformance of the
Team
software metrics used in large-scale ASD, while the secondary production project with the quality standards
objective was to find the reasons for adopting the software Planned Helps managers to understand how
metrics in large-scale ASD. From the survey data, [3] Program
velocity much the team is delivering.
identified 422 potential metrics used by the organizations. Measures the amount of work the
After removing duplicates and filtering out metrics with Program
team has to perform to complete all
insufficient information, [3] obtained 196 metrics for analysis. velocity per Program
the planned work for the successful
sprint
Afterward, [3] classified these 196 metrics as either Agile or delivery of the product.
Traditional. According to [3], Agile metrics are those metrics Number of Helps the project managers
that satisfy any of the following criteria. features per understand how the proposed
Program
Program adjustments are impacting
 Metrics calculated on agile concepts such as story Increment (PI) productivity.
points or user stories. Planned
program Helps in sharing project updates
 Metrics related to continuous integration and velocity per and progress with all stakeholders.
Program
delivery. sprint
Helps the project manager and their
 Metrics related to agile events like sprint planning or Release burn-
teams to set and accomplish goals Program
sprint review meetings. down
over a specific period.

 Metrics related to agile artifacts like the product or Helps the project manager to
sprint backlog. compare the budget with the actual
Test Coverage Program
cost of the project and forecast
[3] has also categorized organizations into four levels revenues and expenses.
based on large-scale ASD and identified the top 10 metrics
used in these organizations. Table III shows these top 10
metrics, their description, and organizational level. The Software quality is one of the fundamental attributes of
organization levels defined by [3] are: ASD [5]. According to [10], quality attributes define software
quality, quantifying these attributes measures quality, and
 Team level – Organization consisting of a single metrics are the formulas or functions that measure quality
scrum team of around nine team members. attributes. Quality attributes listed by [10] for defining the
software quality are as follows:
 Program level – Organization consisting of multiple
teams that develop one product. This level covers  Maintainability
multiple groups of teams that develop sub-products of
one large product.  Availability

 Portfolio level – Organization consisting of a group of  Reliability

programs.  Portability
 Organization level – Organization consisting of  Testability
multiple portfolios. Government regulations
influence the corporate strategy of the organization.  Reusability
Organizations use metrics to monitor, control, assess, Various metrics define each of the quality attributes in
manage, and improve their processes, thus increasing the ASD [10]. Table IV shows the list of metrics and their
overall transparency of their ASD processes [3]. Moreover, description for each quality attribute.
experts adopt release and epic burn-down charts to monitor
Finding the best-suited software metrics according to the
the program’s progress and deviations from its plan [3].
organization’s needs is difficult [11]. Before the work of [11],
According to the [3], the most widely use metric is Story point
there was no categorization of software metrics based on their
estimation, followed by Velocity, Burn-down charts, Defects
impact on the organization. [11] recognizes this gap and
in production, Planned velocity, and Program velocity per
categorizes the software metrics in ASD as high-level impact
sprint. The number of metrics applied at each organizational
metrics, mid-level impact metrics, and low-level impact
level as defined by [3] are as follows: Program level – 142
metrics. Table V shows high-level, mid-level, and low-level
metrics, Team level – 42 metrics, Organizational level – 9
impact metrics defined by [11].
metrics, Portfolio level – 5 metrics.
 TABLE IV. SOFTWARE QUALITY ATTRIBUTES AND THEIR METRICS.

Software Quality Attribute Quality Metrics Description

Maintainability is measured by MTTR. MTTR is the average time

Maintainability Mean time to repair (MTTR) to repair a system technically or mechanically. It includes both the
repair time and any testing time.

Mean time to failure (MTTF)

Availability Availability is measured as a relation of MTTF and MTTR.
Mean time to repair (MTTR)

Reliability Mean time to failure (MTTF) Reliability is measured as the inverse of MTTF

Number of successful ports

Availability is measured as a relation of “Number of successful
Portability
ports” and “Total number of ports.
Total number of ports

Observability

Simplicity
Testability is measured by observability, simplicity, modularity,
Testability
and stability.
Modularity

Stability

Weighted Maintainability (Product of Weight and

Maintainability metric)
Weighted Adaptability (Product of Weight and
Adaptability metric) Reusability is measured as the summation of weight multiplied by
the composite metric of each attribute defined for measuring
Weighted Documentation (Product of Weight and
Reusability reusability. Maintainability, adaptability, documentation,
Documentation metric)
complexity, and availability are the attributes that define
Weighted Complexity reusability.
(Product of Weight and Complexity metric)
Weighted Availability (Product of Weight and
Availability metric)

[11] conducted a systematic mapping study and  Focus factor – 77%

determined 19 software metrics that directly impact ASD.
Afterward, 11 classified these 19 metrics as high, mid, and  Cost of quality – 69%
low-level impact metrics based on the percentage of their  Defect severity index – 67%
usage in the organizations. High-level impact metrics have
high business value, and many organizations recommend  Technical debt – 65%
them. The academia also recognizes high-level impact metrics
 Defect slippage rate – 63%
as the most critical and studies them extensively. Low-level
impact metrics have low business value, and a few  Customer satisfaction survey – 60%
organizations recommend them.
 Accuracy of estimation – 58%
[14] conducted a survey and interview-based analysis
from practitioners of 24 companies and determined 22  Accuracy of forecast – 54%
software metrics for ASD. According to [14], the software  Net promoter score – 54%
metrics and their percent usage in ASD are as follows:
 Requirements clarity index – 54%
 Delivery on time – 90%
 Defect density – 54%
 Work capacity – 88%
 Defect removal efficiency – 52%
 Unit test coverage for the developed code – 88%
 Targeted value increase – 35%
 Percentage of adopted work – 81%
[14] recommends the top 10 of their identified metrics,
 Bug correction time from new-to-closed state – 81% which focus on product quality, team productivity, and
 Sprint-level effort burn-down – 81% predictability as the most critical metrics in ASD. [14] also
identified the Thumbs-up Rule, Non-compliance Index, and
 Velocity – 79% Top-Hill View as the new software metrics in ASD.
According to [14], the use of appropriate metrics reduces the
 Percentage of found work – 79%
burden of data collection for ASD performance improvement
 Open defect severity index – 79% and leads to better products and teams.
 TABLE V. SOFTWARE METRICS AND THEIR IMPACT. IV. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
Software Metrics Impact Level Agile software development has enormous benefits, and
Performance on Delivery High
organizations are adopting it globally. Adopting Agile
methodologies and getting all the benefits of this methodology
Cycle Completion Rate High is challenging. Software metrics come as a rescuer in this
Development Speed High situation and allow the monitoring of Agile methodologies.
Data Quality Cost High
This research is a collection of software metrics used in Agile
software development. It identifies various reasons for
Functional Quality Cost High adopting software metrics in the Agile framework, their
Coverage of Unit Test High benefits, and their importance. This study reviews several
published empirical studies, metrics models, case studies,
Work Adaptation Rate Mid
systematic literature reviews, and survey reports to determine
Client Communication Mid the software metrics used in ASD.
System Test Mid
Although there is a lot of published literature on software
Defect Correction Time Mid metrics in ASD, given the relevance, and vast and difficult
Slipping Defect Rate Mid nature of the topic, it appears that only a small amount of work
has been published thus far. The published research work
Focus Factor Mid
focuses on various aspects of software metrics in Agile, and
Severe Defect Rate Mid several metrics models have been proposed to solve specific
Team Assessment Mid challenges; however, there is a need for detailed empirical
studies to evaluate the usefulness of these metrics models in
Estimation Accuracy Mid
large-scale enterprises. Moreover, the practical advantages of
Forecast Accuracy Mid deploying these metrics models on an industrial scale are yet
Clarity in Requirements Low to be established. Published literature on the utilization of
software metrics in developing e-commerce or other types of
Team Communications Low big data software systems is rare.
One of the limitations of this research paper is the small
B. RQ2: Why do the organizations use software metrics in number of published research papers for the literature review.
Agile software development? This is because only those research papers were selected
The answer to this question attempts to find the reasons for which have open access. Moreover, this literature review
adopting software metrics in ASD. According to [2] and [3], attempts to link several aspects of software metrics in ASD in
the primary reasons for using software metrics in ASD are a single article. It covers empirical studies, systematic
improved product delivery and better transparency. According literature reviews, metric models, case studies, and survey
to [2], [3], [7], [12], [13], [14], and [16], the following are the reports. A much better and more systematic approach would
main reasons for using software metrics in ASD. be to provide a literature review on each aspect of the
published literature separately. The topics of future research
 Accelerated software delivery would be to identify gaps in the empirical studies of the
published literature or to provide a systematic literature
 Enhanced ability to manage changing priorities
review of the published metric models.
 Increased productivity
REFERENCES
 Improved business and IT alignment [1] N. Fenton and J. Bieman, Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical
Approach, Third Edition, 3rd ed. USA: CRC Press, Inc., 2014.
 Enhanced software quality
[2] E. Kandengwa and L. T. Khoza, “Measuring Agile software project
 Enhanced delivery predictability success beyond the triple constraint,” in SA Journal of Information
Management, vol. 23, no. 1, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.4102/sajim.v23i1.1375.
 Improved project visibility [3] P. Philipp, F. Tobisch, and F. Matthes, “Investigating the Adoption of
Metrics in Large-Scale Agile Software Development,” in PACIS 2022
 Reduced project cost Proceedings, Jul. 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2022/231/. [Accessed Dec. 21, 2023].
 Improved team morale [4] P. Philipp, F. Tobisch, L. Menzel, and F. Matthes, “Toward a Metric
Catalog for Large-Scale Agile Development,” in AMCIS 2022
 Reduced project risk Proceedings, Aug. 2022. [Online]. Available:
https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2022/sig_itpm/sig_itpm/3/. [Accessed
 Improved engineering discipline Dec. 21, 2023].
 Increased software maintainability [5] S. O. Barraood, H. Mohd, F. Baharom and A. Almogahed, "Verifying
Agile Black-Box Test Case Quality Measurements: Expert Review," in
 Better management of distributed teams IEEE Access, vol. 11, pp. 106987-107003, 2023, doi:
10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3320576.
 Improvement in transparency, control, planning, [6] S. Sharma, D. Kumar, and M. Fayad, “On The Sprint Length
motivation, agility, problem identification, and Estimation Technique in Agile Software Development Using Planning
stakeholder involvement. Poker”, in International Journal of Agile Systems and Management,
vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 205- 225, May 2023.
[7] M. Choraś et al., "Measuring and Improving Agile Processes in a
Small-Size Software Development Company," in IEEE Access, vol. 8,
pp. 78452-78466, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990117.
View publication stats

[8] M. Usman, E. Mendes, F. Weidt, and R. Britto, “Effort Estimation in

Agile Software Development: A Systematic Literature Review”, in
Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Predictive
Models in Software Engineering, pp. 82–91, 2014, doi:
10.1145/2639490.2639503.
[9] Y. I. Alzoubi and A. Q. Gill, “Can Agile Enterprise Architecture be
Implemented Successfully in Distributed Agile Development?
Empirical Findings,” in Global Journal of Flexible Systems
Management, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 221–235, Jun. 2022, doi:
10.1007/s40171-022-00298-w.
[10] I. Charles and N. I. Caesar, “Quantifying Software Quality in Agile
Development Environment,” in Software Engineering, vol. 9, no. 2, pp.
36–44, 2021, doi: 10.11648/j.se.20210902.11.
[11] S. S. Hossain, P. Ahmed, and Y. Arafat, ‘Software Process Metrics in
Agile Software Development: A Systematic Mapping Study’,
in Computational Science and Its Applications -- ICCSA 2021, pp. 15–
26, 2021, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-87013-3_2.
[12] R. Dixit and B. Bhushan, “Scrum: An Agile Software Development
Process and Metrics”, in Journal on Today’s Ideas - Tomorrow’s
Technologies, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 73–87, Jun. 2019, doi:
10.15415/jotitt.2019.71005.
[13] T. Roeck, P. Hoffmann, K. Spohrer, T. Schimmer, and A. Heinzl,
“Assessing the Impact of Empirical Process Control Metrics in Agile
Software Development - A Framework based on Improvement
Capability,” in ECIS 2022 Research Papers, Jun. 2022. [Online].
Available: https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2022_rp/22/. [Accessed Dec. 23,
2023].
[14] K. V. J. Padmini, H. M. N. Dilum Bandara, and I. Perera, “Use of
software metrics in agile software development process”, in 2015
Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference (MERCon), 2015, pp.
312–317, doi: 10.1109/MERCon.2015.7112365.
[15] P. Ram, P. Rodriguez, M. Oivo, and S. Martínez-Fernández, “Success
Factors for Effective Process Metrics Operationalization in Agile
Software Development: A Multiple Case Study”, in 2019 IEEE/ACM
International Conference on Software and System Processes (ICSSP),
2019, pp. 14–23, doi: 10.1109/ICSSP.2019.00013.
[16] C. Fagarasan, C. Cristea, M. Cristea, O. Popa, and A. Pisla,
“Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Project and Portfolio
Performance Assessment in Agile Software Development: A Data-
Driven Scoring Model”, in Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 17, 2023, doi:
10.3390/su151713139.
[17] M. Huss, D. R. Herber, and J. M. Borky, “Comparing Measured Agile
Software Development Metrics Using an Agile Model-Based Software
Engineering Approach versus Scrum Only”, in Software, vol. 2, no. 3,
pp. 310–331, 2023, doi: 10.3390/software2030015.
[18] G. Destefanis, S. Counsell, G. Concas, and R. Tonelli, “Software
Metrics in Agile Software: An Empirical Study”, in Agile Processes in
Software Engineering and Extreme Programming, 2014, pp. 157–170,
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-06862-6_11.
[19] J. Heidenberg, M. Weijola, K. Mikkonen, and I. Porres, “A Metrics
Model to Measure the Impact of an Agile Transformation in Large
Software Development Organizations”, in Agile Processes in Software
Engineering and Extreme Programming, 2013, pp. 165–179, doi:
10.1007/978-3-642-38314-4_12.
[20] G. Concas, M. Marchesi, G. Destefanis, and R. Tonelli, “An Empirical
Study of Software Metrics for Assessing the Phases of an Agile
Project”, in International Journal of Software Engineering and
Knowledge Engineering, vol. 22, no. 04, pp. 525–548, Jun. 2012, doi:
10.1142/s0218194012500131.
[21] Y. I. Alzoubi and A. Q. Gill, "An Empirical Investigation of
Geographically Distributed Agile Development: The Agile Enterprise
Architecture is a Communication Enabler," in IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp.
80269-80289, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2990389.
[22] K. Schwaber, ‘SCRUM Development Process’, in Business Object
Design and Implementation, 1997, pp. 117–134, doi: 10.1007/978-1-
4471-0947-1_11.
[23] S. Ashraf, S. Aftab, "Latest Transformations in Scrum: A State of the
Art Review", in International Journal of Modern Education and
Computer Science(IJMECS), Vol.9, No.7, pp.12-22, 2017.DOI:
10.5815/ijmecs.2017.07.02