Dynamic systems development method
Dynamic systems development method is an agile project delivery framework used as a software development method. First released in 1994, DSDM sought to provide some discipline to the rapid application development method. In versions the DSDM Agile Project Framework was revised and became a generic approach to project management and solution delivery rather than being focused on software development and code creation and could be used for non-IT projects; the DSDM Agile Project Framework covers a wide range of activities across the whole project lifecycle and includes strong foundations and governance, which set it apart from some other Agile methods. The DSDM Agile Project Framework is an iterative and incremental approach that embraces principles of Agile development, including continuous user/customer involvement. DSDM fixes cost and time at the outset and uses the MoSCoW prioritisation of scope into musts, shoulds and won't haves to adjust the project deliverable to meet the stated time constraint.
DSDM is one of a number of Agile methods for developing software and non-IT solutions, it forms a part of the Agile Alliance. In 2014, DSDM released the latest version of the method in the'DSDM Agile Project Framework'. At the same time the new DSDM manual recognised the need to operate alongside other frameworks for service delivery PRINCE2, Managing Successful Programmes, PMI; the previous version had only contained guidance on. In the early 1990s, rapid application development was spreading across the IT industry; the user interfaces for software applications were moving from the old green screens to the graphical user interfaces that are used today. New application development tools were coming on the market, such as PowerBuilder; these enabled developers to share their proposed solutions much more with their customers – prototyping became a reality and the frustrations of the classical, sequential development methods could be put to one side. However, the RAD movement was unstructured: there was no agreed definition of a suitable process and many organisations came up with their own definition and approach.
Many major corporations were interested in the possibilities but they were concerned that they did not lose the level of quality in the end deliverables that free-flow development could give rise to. The DSDM Consortium was founded in 1994 by an association of vendors and experts in the field of software engineering and was created with the objective of "jointly developing and promoting an independent RAD framework" by combining their best practice experiences; the origins were an event organised by the Butler Group in London. People at that meeting all worked for blue-chip organisations such as British Airways, American Express and Logica. In July 2006, DSDM Public Version 4.2 was made available for individuals to use. In 2014, the DSDM handbook was made available public. Additionally, templates for DSDM can be downloaded. In October 2016 the DSDM Consortium rebranded as the Agile Business Consortium; the Agile Business Consortium is a not-for-profit, vendor-independent organisation which owns and administers the DSDM framework.
Atern is a vendor-independent approach that recognises that more projects fail because of people problems than technology. Atern’s focus is on helping people to work together to achieve the business goals. Atern is independent of tools and techniques enabling it to be used in any business and technical environment without tying the business to a particular vendor. There are eight principles underpinning DSDM Atern; these principles direct the team in the attitude they must take and the mindset they must adopt to deliver consistently. Focus on the business need Deliver on time Collaborate Never compromise quality Build incrementally from firm foundations Develop iteratively Communicate continuously and Demonstrate control Timeboxing: is the approach for completing the project incrementally by breaking it down into splitting the project in portions, each with a fixed budget and a delivery date. For each portion a number of requirements are selected; because time and budget are fixed, the only remaining variables are the requirements.
So if a project is running out of time or money the requirements with the lowest priority are omitted. This does not mean that an unfinished product is delivered, because of the Pareto Principle that 80% of the project comes from 20% of the system requirements, so as long as those most important 20% of requirements are implemented into the system, the system therefore meets the business needs and that no system is built in the first try. MoSCoW: is a technique for prioritising work requirements, it is an acronym that stands for: MUST have SHOULD have COULD have WON'T havePrototyping: refers to the creation of prototypes of the system under development at an early stage of the project. It enables the early discovery of shortcomings in the system and allows future users to ‘test-drive’ the system; this way good user involvement is realised, one of the key success factors of DSDM, or any System Development project for that matter. Testing: helps ensure a solution of good quality, DSDM advocates testing throughout each iteration.
Since DSDM is a tool and technique independent method, the project team is free to choose its own test management method. Workshop: brings project stakeholders together to discuss requirements and mutual understanding. Model
A stand-up meeting is a meeting in which attendees participate while standing. The discomfort of standing for long periods is intended to keep the meetings short. By tradition, the Privy Council of the United Kingdom meets standing; some software development methodologies envision daily team-meetings to make commitments to team members. The daily commitments allow participants to know about potential challenges as well as to coordinate efforts to resolve difficult and/or time-consuming issues; the stand-up has particular value in Agile software development processes, such as Scrum or Kanban, but can be utilized in context of any software-development methodology. The meetings are timeboxed to between 5 and 15 minutes, take place with participants standing up to remind people to keep the meeting short and to-the-point; the stand-up meeting is sometimes referred to as the "stand-up", "morning rollcall" or "daily scrum". The meeting should place every working day. All team members are encouraged to attend, but the meetings are not postponed if some of the team members are not present.
One of the crucial features is that the meeting is a communication opportunity among team members and not a status update to management or stakeholders. Although it is sometimes referred to as a type of status meeting, the structure of the meeting is meant to promote follow-up conversation, as well as to identify issues before they become too problematic; the practice promotes closer working relationships in its frequency, need for follow-up conversations and short structure, which in turn result in a higher rate of knowledge transfer – a much more active intention than the typical status meeting. Team members take turns speaking, sometimes passing along a token to indicate the current person allowed to speak; each member talks about progress since the last stand-up, the anticipated work until the next stand-up and any impediments, taking the opportunity to ask for help or collaborate. Team members may sometimes ask for short clarifications and make brief statements, such as "Let's talk about this more after the meeting", but the stand-up does not consist of full-fledged discussions.
Scrum-style stand-ups convene daily to re-plan in-progress development. Though it may not be practical to limit all discussion to these three questions, the objective is to create a new sprint plan within the time box, while deferring discussions about impediments until after the event is complete. Team members address three questions as input to this planning: What did I do yesterday that helped the development team meet the sprint goal? What will I do today to help the development team meet the sprint goal? Do I see any impediment that prevents me or the development team from meeting the sprint goal? Whereas Kanban-style daily stand-ups focus more on: What obstacles are impeding my progress? What has progressed? Lean software development Five Ws A pocket guide for effective stand-up meetings Patterns Of Daily Stand-up Meetings, Jason Yip Are your standups awesome? Article Opening Communication within a Scrum Team from Methods & Tools Straya, Viktoria. K.. "The daily stand-up meeting: A grounded theory study".
Journal of Systems and Software. 114: 101–124. Doi:10.1016/j.jss.2016.01.004. Retrieved 2016-03-01
The Unified Software Development Process or Unified Process is an iterative and incremental software development process framework. The best-known and extensively documented refinement of the Unified Process is the Rational Unified Process. Other examples are Agile Unified Process; the Unified Process is not a process, but rather an extensible framework which should be customized for specific organizations or projects. The Rational Unified Process is a customizable framework; as a result, it is impossible to say whether a refinement of the process was derived from UP or from RUP, so the names tend to be used interchangeably. The name Unified Process as opposed to Rational Unified Process is used to describe the generic process, including those elements which are common to most refinements; the Unified Process name is used to avoid potential issues of trademark infringement since Rational Unified Process and RUP are trademarks of IBM. The first book to describe the process was titled The Unified Software Development Process and published in 1999 by Ivar Jacobson, Grady Booch and James Rumbaugh.
Since various authors unaffiliated with Rational Software have published books and articles using the name Unified Process, whereas authors affiliated with Rational Software have favored the name Rational Unified Process. In 2012 the Disciplined Agile Delivery framework was released, a hybrid framework that adopts and extends strategies from Unified Process, Scrum, XP, other methods; the Unified Process is incremental development process. The Elaboration and Transition phases are divided into a series of timeboxed iterations; each iteration results in an increment, a release of the system that contains added or improved functionality compared with the previous release. Although most iterations will include work in most of the process disciplines the relative effort and emphasis will change over the course of the project; the Unified Process insists that architecture sits at the heart of the project team's efforts to shape the system. Since no single model is sufficient to cover all aspects of a system, the Unified Process supports multiple architectural models and views.
One of the most important deliverables of the process is the executable architecture baseline, created during the Elaboration phase. This partial implementation of the system serves to validate the architecture and act as a foundation for remaining development; the Unified Process requires the project team to focus on addressing the most critical risks early in the project life cycle. The deliverables of each iteration in the Elaboration phase, must be selected in order to ensure that the greatest risks are addressed first; the Unified Process divides the project into four phases: Inception Elaboration Construction Transition Inception is the smallest phase in the project, ideally it should be quite short. If the Inception Phase is long it may be an indication of excessive up-front specification, contrary to the spirit of the Unified Process; the following are typical goals for the Inception phase: Establish Prepare a preliminary project schedule and cost estimate Feasibility Buy or develop itThe Lifecycle Objective Milestone marks the end of the Inception phase.
Develop an approximate vision of the system, make the business case, define the scope, produce rough estimate for cost and schedule. During the Elaboration phase, the project team is expected to capture a healthy majority of the system requirements. However, the primary goals of Elaboration are to address known risk factors and to establish and validate the system architecture. Common processes undertaken in this phase include the creation of use case diagrams, conceptual diagrams and package diagrams; the architecture is validated through the implementation of an Executable Architecture Baseline. This is a partial implementation of the system which includes the core most architecturally significant components, it is built in a series of small time-boxed iterations. By the end of the Elaboration phase, the system architecture must have stabilized and the executable architecture baseline must demonstrate that the architecture will support the key system functionality and exhibit the right behavior in terms of performance and cost.
The final Elaboration phase deliverable is a plan for the Construction phase. At this point the plan should be accurate and credible since it should be based on the Elaboration phase experience and since significant risk factors should have been addressed during the Elaboration phase. Construction is the largest phase of the project. In this phase, the remainder of the system is built on the foundation laid in Elaboration. System features are implemented in a series of time-boxed iterations; each iteration results in an executable release of the software. It is customary to write full-text use cases during the construction phase and each one becomes the start of a new iteration. Common Unified Modeling Language diagrams used during this phase include activity diagrams, sequence diagrams, collaboration diagrams, State Transition diagrams and interaction overview diagrams. Iterative implementation for the lower risks and easier elements are done; the final Construction phase deliverable is software ready to be deployed in the Transition phase.
The final project phase is Transition. In this phase the system is deployed to the target users. Fe
Debugging is the process of finding and resolving defects or problems within a computer program that prevent correct operation of computer software or a system. Debugging tactics can involve interactive debugging, control flow analysis, unit testing, integration testing, log file analysis, monitoring at the application or system level, memory dumps, profiling; the terms "bug" and "debugging" are popularly attributed to Admiral Grace Hopper in the 1940s. While she was working on a Mark II computer at Harvard University, her associates discovered a moth stuck in a relay and thereby impeding operation, whereupon she remarked that they were "debugging" the system. However, the term "bug", in the sense of "technical error", dates back at least to 1878 and Thomas Edison; the term "debugging" seems to have been used as a term in aeronautics before entering the world of computers. Indeed, in an interview Grace Hopper remarked; the moth fit the existing terminology, so it was saved. A letter from J. Robert Oppenheimer used the term in a letter to Dr. Ernest Lawrence at UC Berkeley, dated October 27, 1944, regarding the recruitment of additional technical staff.
The Oxford English Dictionary entry for "debug" quotes the term "debugging" used in reference to airplane engine testing in a 1945 article in the Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society. An article in "Airforce" refers to debugging, this time of aircraft cameras. Hopper's bug was found on September 9, 1947; the term was not adopted by computer programmers until the early 1950s. The seminal article by Gill in 1951 is the earliest in-depth discussion of programming errors, but it does not use the term "bug" or "debugging". In the ACM's digital library, the term "debugging" is first used in three papers from 1952 ACM National Meetings. Two of the three use the term in quotation marks. By 1963 "debugging" was a common enough term to be mentioned in passing without explanation on page 1 of the CTSS manual. Kidwell's article Stalking the Elusive Computer Bug discusses the etymology of "bug" and "debug" in greater detail; as software and electronic systems have become more complex, the various common debugging techniques have expanded with more methods to detect anomalies, assess impact, schedule software patches or full updates to a system.
The words "anomaly" and "discrepancy" can be used, as being more neutral terms, to avoid the words "error" and "defect" or "bug" where there might be an implication that all so-called errors, defects or bugs must be fixed. Instead, an impact assessment can be made to determine if changes to remove an anomaly would be cost-effective for the system, or a scheduled new release might render the change unnecessary. Not all issues are mission-critical in a system, it is important to avoid the situation where a change might be more upsetting to users, long-term, than living with the known problem. Basing decisions of the acceptability of some anomalies can avoid a culture of a "zero-defects" mandate, where people might be tempted to deny the existence of problems so that the result would appear as zero defects. Considering the collateral issues, such as the cost-versus-benefit impact assessment broader debugging techniques will expand to determine the frequency of anomalies to help assess their impact to the overall system.
Debugging ranges in complexity from fixing simple errors to performing lengthy and tiresome tasks of data collection and scheduling updates. The debugging skill of the programmer can be a major factor in the ability to debug a problem, but the difficulty of software debugging varies with the complexity of the system, depends, to some extent, on the programming language used and the available tools, such as debuggers. Debuggers are software tools which enable the programmer to monitor the execution of a program, stop it, restart it, set breakpoints, change values in memory; the term debugger can refer to the person, doing the debugging. High-level programming languages, such as Java, make debugging easier, because they have features such as exception handling and type checking that make real sources of erratic behaviour easier to spot. In programming languages such as C or assembly, bugs may cause silent problems such as memory corruption, it is difficult to see where the initial problem happened.
In those cases, memory debugger tools may be needed. In certain situations, general purpose software tools that are language specific in nature can be useful; these take the form of static code analysis tools. These tools look for a specific set of known problems, some common and some rare, within the source code. Concentrating more on the semantics rather than the syntax, as compilers and interpreters do; some tools claim to be able to detect over 300 different problems. Both commercial and free tools exist for various languages; these tools can be useful when checking large source trees, where it is impractical to do code walkthroughs. A typical example of a problem detected would be a variable dereference that occurs before the variable is assigned a value; as another example, some such tools perform strong type checking when the language does not require it. Thus, they are better at locating errors in code, syntactically correct, but these tools have a reputation of false positives. The old Unix lint program is an early example.
For debugging electronic hardware (e.g
Rational Unified Process
The Rational Unified Process is an iterative software development process framework created by the Rational Software Corporation, a division of IBM since 2003. RUP is not a single concrete prescriptive process, but rather an adaptable process framework, intended to be tailored by the development organizations and software project teams that will select the elements of the process that are appropriate for their needs. RUP is a specific implementation of the Unified Process. Rational Software developed the rational unified process as a software process product; the product includes a hyperlinked knowledge-base with sample artifacts and detailed descriptions for many different types of activities. RUP is included in the IBM Rational Method Composer product which allows customization of the process. Philippe Kruchten, an experienced Rational technical representative was tasked with heading up the original RUP team; this journey began with the creation of the Rational Objectory Process in 1996, when Rational acquired the Objectory Process, written by Ivar Jacobson and company.
This was renamed Rational Unified Process in subsequent releases, in part to align the name with that of the Unified Modeling Language. These initial versions combined the Rational Software organisation's extensive field experience building object-oriented systems with Objectory's guidance on practices such as use cases, incorporated extensive content from Jim Rumbaugh's Object Modeling Technology approach to modeling, Grady Booch's Booch method, the newly released UML 0.8. To help make this growing knowledge base more accessible, Philippe Kruchten was tasked with the assembly of an explicit process framework for modern software engineering; this effort employed the HTML-based process delivery mechanism developed by Objectory. The resulting "Rational Unified Process" completed a strategic tripod for Rational: a tailorable process that guided development tools that automated the application of that process services that accelerated adoption of both the process and the tools; this guidance was augmented in subsequent versions with knowledge based on the experience of companies that Rational had acquired.
In 1997, a requirements and test discipline were added to the approach, much of the additional material sourced from the Requirements College method developed by Dean Leffingwell et al. at Requisite, Inc. and the SQA Process method developed at SQA Inc. both companies having been acquired by Rational Software. In 1998 Rational Software added two new disciplines: business modeling, much of this content had been in the Objectory Process a Configuration and Change Management discipline, sourced through the acquisition of Pure Atria Corporation; these additions lead to an overarching set of principles that were defined by Rational and articulated within RUP as the six best practices for modern software engineering: Develop iteratively, with risk as the primary iteration driver Manage requirements Employ a component-based architecture Model software visually Continuously verify quality Control changesThese best practices were aligned with Rational's product line, both drove the ongoing development of Rational's products, as well as being used by Rational's field teams to help customers improve the quality and predictability of their software development efforts.
Additional techniques including performance testing, UI Design, data engineering were included, an update to reflect changes in UML 1.1. In 1999, a project management discipline was introduced, as well as techniques to support real-time software development and updates to reflect UML 1.3. Besides, the first book to describe the process, The Unified Software Development Process, was published in the same year. Between 2000 and 2003, a number of changes introduced guidance from ongoing Rational field experience with iterative development, in addition to tool support for enacting RUP instances and for customization of the RUP framework; these changes included: the introduction of concepts and techniques from approaches such as eXtreme Programming, that would come to be known collectively as agile methods. This included techniques such as pair programming, test-first design, papers that explained how RUP enabled XP to scale for use on larger projects. A complete overhaul of the testing discipline to better reflect how testing work was conducted in different iterative development contexts.
The introduction of supporting guidance - known as "tool mentors" - for enacting the RUP practices in various tools. These provided step-by-step method support to Rational tool users. Automating the customization of RUP in a way that would allow customers to select parts from the RUP process framework, customize their selection with their own additions, still incorporate improvements in subsequent releases from Rational. IBM acquired Rational Software in February 2003. In 2006, IBM created a subset of RUP tailored for the delivery of Agile projects - released as an OpenSource method called OpenUP through the Eclipse web-site. RUP is based on a set of building blocks and content elements, describing what is to be produced, the necessary skills required and the step-by-step explanation describing how specific development goals are to be achieved; the main building blocks, or content elements, are the following: Roles – A role defines a set of related skills and responsibilities. Work products – A work product represents something resulting from a task, including all the documents and models produced while working through the process.
Tasks – A task describes a unit of work assigned to a Role that provides a meaningful result. Within each iteration, the task
Scrum (software development)
Scrum is an agile framework for managing knowledge work, with an emphasis on software development, although it has wide application in other fields and is starting to be explored by traditional project teams more generally. It is designed for teams of three to nine members, who break their work into actions that can be completed within timeboxed iterations, called sprints, no longer than one month and most two weeks track progress and re-plan in 15-minute time-boxed stand-up meetings, called daily scrums. Approaches to coordinating the work of multiple scrum teams in larger organizations include large-scale scrum, scaled agile framework, scrum of scrums, Scrum@Scale, the Nexus, among others. Scrum is a lightweight and incremental framework for managing product development, it defines "a flexible, holistic product development strategy where a development team works as a unit to reach a common goal", challenges assumptions of the "traditional, sequential approach" to product development, enables teams to self-organize by encouraging physical co-location or close online collaboration of all team members, as well as daily face-to-face communication among all team members and disciplines involved.
A key principle of Scrum is the dual recognition that customers will change their minds about what they want or need and that there will be unpredictable challenges—for which a predictive or planned approach is not suited. As such, Scrum adopts an evidence-based empirical approach—accepting that the problem cannot be understood or defined up front, instead focusing on how to maximize the team's ability to deliver to respond to emerging requirements, to adapt to evolving technologies and changes in market conditions. Scrum is seen written in all-capitals, as SCRUM; the word is not an acronym, so this is not correct. While the trademark on the term Scrum itself has been allowed to lapse, it is deemed as owned by the wider community rather than an individual, so the leading capital for Scrum is retained in this article. Many of the terms used in Scrum are written with leading capitals. However, to maintain an encyclopedic tone, this article uses normal sentence case for these terms — unless they are recognized marks.
Hirotaka Takeuchi and Ikujiro Nonaka introduced the term scrum in the context of product development in their 1986 Harvard Business Review article, "The New New Product Development Game". Takeuchi and Nonaka argued in The Knowledge Creating Company that it is a form of "organizational knowledge creation good at bringing about innovation continuously and spirally"; the authors described a new approach to commercial product development that would increase speed and flexibility, based on case studies from manufacturing firms in the automotive and printer industries. They called this the holistic or rugby approach, as the whole process is performed by one cross-functional team across multiple overlapping phases, in which the team "tries to go the distance as a unit, passing the ball back and forth". In the early 1990s, Ken Schwaber used what would become Scrum at his company, Advanced Development Methods. In 1995, Sutherland and Schwaber jointly presented a paper describing the scrum framework at the Business Object Design and Implementation Workshop held as part of Object-Oriented Programming, Languages & Applications'95 in Austin, Texas.
Over the following years and Sutherland collaborated to combine this material—with their experience and evolving good practice—to develop what became known as Scrum. In 2001, Schwaber worked with Mike Beedle to describe the method in the book, Agile Software Development with Scrum. Scrum's approach to planning and managing product development involves bringing decision-making authority to the level of operation properties and certainties. In 2002, Schwaber with others founded the Scrum Alliance and set up the Certified Scrum accreditation series. Schwaber left the Scrum Alliance in late 2009 and founded Scrum.org which oversees the parallel Professional Scrum accreditation series. Since 2009, a public document called The Scrum Guide has defined Scrum, it has been revised 5 times, with the current version being November 2017. In 2018, Schwaber and the Scrum.org community, along with leaders of the Kanban community, published The Kanban Guide for Scrum Teams. There are three roles in the scrum framework.
These are ideally co-located to ensure optimal communication among team members. Together these three roles form the scrum team. While many organizations have other roles involved with defining and delivering the product, Scrum defines only these three; the product owner represents the product's stakeholders and the voice of the customer, is responsible for the product backlog and accountable for maximizing the value that the team delivers. The product owner defines the product in customer-centric terms, adds them to the product backlog, prioritizes them based on importance and dependencies. A scrum team should have only one product owner; this role should not be combined with that of the scrum master. The product owner should focus on the business
DevOps is a set of software development practices that combines software development and information technology operations to shorten the systems development life cycle while delivering features and updates in close alignment with business objectives. Academics and practitioners have not developed a unique definition for the term "DevOps."From an academic perspective, Len Bass, Ingo Weber, Liming Zhu—three computer science researchers from the CSIRO and the Software Engineering Institute—suggested defining DevOps as "a set of practices intended to reduce the time between committing a change to a system and the change being placed into normal production, while ensuring high quality". The term DevOps, has been used in multiple contexts. In 2009 Patrick Debois named a conference "devopsdays." The conference has now spread to other countries. As DevOps is intended to be a cross-functional mode of working, those that practice the methodology use different sets of tools—referred to as "toolchains"—rather than a single one.
These toolchains are expected to fit into one or more of the following categories, reflective of key aspects of the development and delivery process: Coding – code development and review, source code management tools, code merging Building – continuous integration tools, build status Testing – continuous testing tools that provide feedback on business risks Packaging – artifact repository, application pre-deployment staging Releasing – change management, release approvals, release automation Configuring – infrastructure configuration and management, infrastructure as code tools Monitoring – applications performance monitoring, end-user experienceSome categories are more essential in a DevOps toolchain than others. Agile and DevOps both utilize practices such as automated build and test, continuous integration, continuous delivery. Agile can be viewed as addressing communication gaps between customers and developers, while DevOps addresses gaps between developers and IT operations / infrastructure.
DevOps has focus on the deployment of developed software, whether it is developed via Agile or other methodologies. ArchOps presents an extension for DevOps practice, starting from software architecture artifacts, instead of source code, for operation deployment.. ArchOps states that architectural models are first-class entities in software development and operations. Continuous delivery and DevOps have common goals and are used in conjunction, but there are subtle differences. While continuous delivery is focused on automating the processes in software delivery, DevOps focuses on the organization change to support great collaboration between the many functions involved. DevOps and continuous delivery share a common background in agile methods and lean thinking: small and frequent changes with focused value to the end customer, they are well communicated and collaborated internally, thus helping achieve faster time to market, with reduced risks. The application of continuous delivery and DevOps to data analytics has been termed DataOps.
DataOps seeks to integrate data engineering, data integration, data quality, data security, data privacy with operations. It applies principles from DevOps, Agile Development and the statistical process control, used in lean manufacturing, to improve the cycle time of extracting value from data analytics. DevSecOps is another practice that rose from DevOps that includes information technology security as a fundamental aspect in all the stages of software development. In 2003, Google developed site reliability engineering, an approach for releasing new features continuously into large-scale high-availability systems while maintaining high-quality end user experience. While SRE predates the development of DevOps, they are viewed as being related to each other; some aspects of DevOps have taken a similar approach. DevOps is viewed as an approach to applying systems administration work to cloud technology. WinOps is the term used for DevOps practices for a Microsoft-centric view; the goals of DevOps span the entire delivery pipeline.
They include: Improved deployment frequency. Simple processes become programmable and dynamic, using a DevOps approach. DevOps aims to maximize the predictability, efficiency and maintainability of operational processes. Automation supports this objective. DevOps integration targets product delivery, continuous testing, quality testing, feature development, maintenance releases in order to improve reliability and security and provide faster development and deployment cycles. Many of the ideas involved in DevOps came from the enterprise systems management and agile software development movements. Companies that practice DevOps have reported significant benefits, including: shorter time to market, improved customer satisfaction, better product quality, more reliable releases, improved productivity and efficiency, the increased ability to build the right product by fast experimentation. There is a lack of evidence in academic literature on the effectiveness of DevOps. A similar absence exists in practice.
F5 Networks, for example, found that only one in five surveyed IT professionals thought that DevOps had a strategic impact on their organization despite rise in usage. The same study found that only 17% of those surveyed identified DevOps as key, well below software as a service, big data, public cloud infrastructure as a service. DevOps in