DOI: https://doi.org/10.

7341/20181442 JEL codes: M11, M15/ 43

Challenges of Applying Agile Principles

and Values to IT Project Management
Carmen Novac1 , Raluca-Silvia Ciochină2
Abstract
The theoretical part of this paper focuses on a macro-analysis of the Agile system
philosophy, one of the most popular project management frameworks from the
software industry. The second part of the paper consists of a case study analyzing
the practices of the Agile framework within a corporation at the level of software
production. As far as methodology is concerned, the qualitative research was
conducted through a case study of a team in a distributed context (“cross-team”).
Participant observation was used as a tool for collecting the data about the
individuals and the processes within the teams. The purpose of the research was to
analyze the current state of implementation, the benefits and challenges of using the
Agile project management framework and also the needs of software development
teams within a multinational company. At the same time, the paper analyzes the
redefinition of roles by applying the Agile project management framework within
the distributed teamwork organization. The research aims to identify the underlying
reasons for the choice of the Agile type of management instead of Lean management
within the software development industry, focusing on the level of implementation of
the Agile/Scrum methodology and principles in distributed teams.
Keywords: Agile, Scrum, IT, project management

INTRODUCTION

IT industry changes have determined the rise of different approaches in

managerial philosophy which are currently applied in Romanian organizations
as well. Software development implies consistent efforts undertaken by IT
managers to coordinate teams and deliver quality, as well as the pressure
to respond to competitive forces that emerge from a highly dynamic and

1 Carmen Novac, Ph.D., National University of Political Studies and Public Administration/Bvd. Expozitiei, No. 30 A,
Bucharest, Romania, e-mail: [email protected]
2 Raluca Ciochina, Ph.D., National University of Political Studies and Public Administration/Bvd. Expozitiei, No. 30 A,
Bucharest, Romania, e-mail: [email protected]

Received 16 February 2018; Revised 1 June 2018, 16 September 2018; Accepted 17 September 2018

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),

Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
44 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

uncertain environment. As Cervone (2011) emphasized, the effort invested

in the planning phase is significant and involves using considerable resources
before development activities begin. This paper focuses on identifying the
approaches and implementation of the Agile project management framework
within a distributed working team context and also the reasons why this system
philosophy and methodology represents a solution for applications and IT
projects design. These concepts are also utilized in other fields of activity such as
research projects or various change management programs and initiatives, but
the main domain in which the Agile philosophy is currently implemented is IT.

The research questions refer to identifying and defining the principles

that led to choosing the Agile management option instead of the Lean
management option within the software development industry.

RQ1: What is the level of implementation of Agile principles and

methodology within distributed teams?

Also, another focus of this paper was to identify and analyze the roles
perspective, especially the responsibilities and attributions of the project
manager within the Scrum team, and of their members.

RQ2: Is there a stability level as far as redefining responsibilities in the

Scrum team is concerned?

The Agile management framework appears to be a pertinent choice

considering the adaptability and innovation principles installed within the IT
departments. Agile principles and Scrum methodology are preferred by most
Romanian multinational organizations which specialize in software production.
The paper is focused on analyzing the Agile principles and the Scrum methodology
and their applicability in the software industry, as well as identifying how the
roles are being redefined within this new management context.

LITERATURE REVIEW

History of the agile principles and philosophy

Agile represents a set of principles developed by 17 software designers in
February 2001, in the USA. Unsatisfied by project evolution and processes
and by the fact that teams were getting more and more limited by various
procedures, which affected their performance, the team of software

Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research

Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 45

developers generated a set of ideas and principles which regularly

appeared in successful projects. These ideas were put together in the Agile
Manifesto (Martin, 1991).
This manifesto consists of the following ideas: finding new, efficient and
inventive ways for software development practices and coordination. The
following core principles were stated: (1) individuals and their interactions are
more important than processes and tools; (2) functional software is prioritized
over complex documentation; (3) client collaboration is more important than
inflexible contracts; (4) adapting to change is more important than following
fixed planning (agilemanifesto.org). All these elements have their own value
and impact project management in their own specific way, adding value to
both clients and developers, and also bringing satisfaction to team members
(Aubry, 2011). The focus is set on two concepts: minimalizing risk through
short iterations of defined deliverables and direct communication with
collaborators in the development process (p. 19). This type of management
can be seen as opposed to other project management models, specifically
to Waterfall methods that represent the typical approach to managing large
projects, which focus on specifications and linear management. The waterfall
approach is called as such because each stage of the project falls into the next
one, without the possibility of reiteration or the possibility of revisiting past
steps (Sutherland, 2014), which is opposite to the iterative process of Agile
project management. The Agile Manifesto also includes the internal learning
of facing and accepting that unpredictable events can happen at any time,
which is why it is essential to collaboratively work as a team, where individuals
and their interactions are more important than documentation. The general
idea behind Agile is that flexibility is primary to everything else: instead of
debating documentation requests, new processes should be implemented
that allow client-team adaptability and ongoing communication.
From an economic perspective, the Agile movement refers to multiple
aspects regarding project management within the current organizational
culture. Throughout time, different kinds of implementations in various
industries appeared, each organization starting to develop internally their
informational library based on the proprietary experience with the projects
that were conducted, demonstrating the need to develop their own iteration
based on specific needs (Kerr & Hunter, 1993).
Agile represents the management paradigm that cannot be applied
within traditional organizations. The Agile mind-set is ideal in situations where
novelty is present (dynamic requests, evolving priorities, flexible results, etc.).
It is worth mentioning that Agile methods are not efficient in industries such
as construction or manufacturing. The Agile mind-set can be implemented in

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),

Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
46 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

other industries as well, but the human factor remains a challenge and studies
still need to address how it can successfully be implemented in this sense.

The Agile principles

“The Agile concepts represent a natural response to the evolution and
dynamics of competitive industries, which allow the multitude of concepts such
as adaptability and dynamic performance to thrive inside an organization”
(Vickoff, 2009).
The Agile philosophy is defined by key values such as collaboration,
communication and multidirectional feedback. Implementing a project is
difficult without direction parameters and without efficient practices, as
unexpected situations emerge all the time. In this sense, repeated errors and
inefficient work can affect client feedback, who can become disappointed by
the low quality of the delivered products, by delays and increasing budgets
(Martin & Martin, 2006). When measured, project success also takes into
account the level of client satisfaction and the quality of the end result – the
product must apply to what was initially expected and it should be delivered
within the established terms (time, costs) and within budget. All organizational
projects are influenced by organizational culture, organizational climate
and identity, by role and responsibility definition, and by organizational
communication. Some organizational cultures favor support, responsibility
and ownership within the project team; some do not.
The 12 Agile principles differentiate Agile practices from other
complicated processes. The priority of Agile management is to satisfy the
client through early delivery of valuable software. The second priority is
to deliver results frequently, through a functionality system that allows
constant feedback. Thus, clients can choose to place these systems in
production if they consider that these are functional or they can test the
existent functionality by requesting future changes to be implemented. For
implementing successful Agile management, frameworks or management
systems have been developed and implemented, such as Scrum and Kanban
(Anderson, 2000). Scrum refers to the management process of product
development within a changing environment; an iterative process “used to
help enable improvement in communication, maximize cooperation, as well
as protect the team from disruptions and impediments” (Cervone, 2011,
p. 20). Therefore, the Scrum method implies adaptation according to both
internal and external factors.
Scrum was first created by Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland, who are
the authors of The Scrum Guide. This framework for project management
can be used in any domain as it is not a predictable process, but a heuristic
Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research
Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 47

and iterative one. Schwaber (2004) insists on the flexibility of Scrum and on
transparency, which are most important to managing software production.
According to the author, the Scrum Master has the project manager role but
undertakes the responsibility of managing the Scrum process and not the
tasks. The roles that are most common are Scrum Master, Product Owner
and the Scrum team (developers, designers, analysts, testers). In this sense,
the process includes practices and terminology and the Scrum Master should
know how to apply them in the right manner (Schwaber, 2004).
In a research conducted by França, da Silva, and de Sousa Mariz (2010),
analysing the perspective of the software team on the relationship between
the adoption of the Agile attributes and project success, 8 attributes where
significantly correlated to project success: (1) regular delivery of software, (2)
delivering the most important features first, (3) correct integration testing,
(4) high competence of team members, (5) following the agile requirement
process, (6) following the agile configuration management process, (7) self-
organizing teamwork, and (8) good customer relationship. Considering the
Scrum main activities, including sprint planning meetings, sprints, daily
Scrum and the sprint review meeting (Cervone, 2011) and the focus of these
activities on committing to delivering functional products through teamwork,
it can be suggested that agile management success is connected to the
attitudes and behaviors of team members involved in the project.
In Scrum sprints, commitment and transparency are important as the
team is empowered to choose specific tasks and deliver them within the
upcoming sprint (Cervone, 2009; Lehnen, 2016). At the end of the sprint,
the team “critically discusses current sprint deliveries jointly” (Lehnen,
2016, p. 224), when challenges and setbacks are being discussed, while
sprint retrospectives are useful mainly for identifying what could have been
done better and what best practices can be developed from the past sprint
experience. Constant inspection is required as an essential step in the Scrum
methodology, even though it is an on-going process which takes time and
effort on behalf of all the members involved (Denning, 2016). Understanding
the setbacks, challenges and the successful practices within the project is
essential for both project life cycle and team collaboration.
Agile management seeks to develop projects around motivated
individuals, as they are one of the most critical factors for project success.
Time pressure and deadlines can determine certain productive behaviors,
but this is not enough.
By conducting a systematic literature review of motivation in Software
Engineering, Beecham et al. (2008) found that earlier models did not take
into account cultural and environmental settings, besides factors such as
career stages or personality. Amongst the most successful factors described
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),
Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
48 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

as motivators were recognition and employee participation and involvement,

or, generally speaking, working with others. Additionally, clear goals and
tasks and the way they fit into the business and qualitative work were also
the most frequently cited motivators in the academic literature (p. 12). As
DeMarco and Lister (2013) pointed out, working under time pressure does
not necessarily imply success of the overall task: “People under time pressure
don`t work better – they just work faster” (p. 18). All the other factors
(process, environment, management) are secondary factors and sensitive to
change if they have antagonistic effects over individuals.
However, Rasnacis and Berzisa (2015) found that the cooperation motives
and the working environment are important to Scrum team members from
a Latvian organization, emphasizing that “if the basic needs of group members
are not satisfied (utility-pragmatic motives), then group members are not
motivated towards more important motives for the development of Agile
projects – personal growth, competition, challenge and creative activity” (p.
127). As a result of the case study, the authors suggested introducing the
role of project manager when the team did not apply the self-organization
principle and the final result was problematic. Therefore, there are many
aspects to be analyzed when investigating the success of Agile project
management methods, as challenges can emerge especially when group
needs are not met.
The most efficient and effective information transfer within a development
team is face-to-face communication. Within Agile projects, through
Scrum methods, team members discuss and negotiate, the first means of
communication being direct face-to-face communication within Scrum
meetings. The documentation is created and updated incrementally on the
same schedule as the software and only if needed. Working software is the
main indicator of progress. Agile projects measure progress by evaluating the
quantity of software that satisfies the client`s needs; they do not measure
progress based on the volume of documentation or the quantity of the
developed code. The result percentage is directly proportional to the percentage
of the requested functionality (Stellmann & Greene, 2014). Agile teams appear
to have a medium rhythm, working with a speed that allows them to keep the
highest standards throughout the entire timeframe of the project.
Agile management encourages continuous attention for technical
excellence, focusing on the qualitative factor. Maximum quality represents
the scope for Agile projects (Misra, Kumar, & Kumar, 2010). Another specific
characteristic refers to the capacity to self-organize: responsibilities are not
set for team members individually, they are communicated to the team as
a whole, as the team is the one determining the best way in which it can deliver
those responsibilities. Thus, Agile teams constantly adjust their structure,
Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research
Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 49

organization, rules, norms, relationships, knowing that the environment is

dynamic and changing (Martin & Martin, 2006).
The primary objective of Agile management is to optimize, from
a functional perspective, the intermediary management layers of the
organization. Intermediary management represents the privileged target of
coaching. Agile stands at the basis of the transition program, as well as at the
individual and collective levels. The Agile manager needs to be rigorous, open
towards new and alternative solutions, available, organized, anticipating,
and actively listening to the team. Besides this, leadership, transparency and
relational qualities are also outstanding. In a permanently expanding and
development environment, the manager needs to deliver fast results by using
limited resources and the results need to be of high quality (Rota, 2010).
As a project management professional, the Agile manager needs to know
and use these techniques, to be able to explain them and justify the choices,
to be able to reproduce practices that worked and ended with positive results
into similar contexts or to adapt them in new contexts. Agile managers should
also know how to accentuate knowledge and how to inspire trust, for being
properly recognized as a professional. Within the project team, the Agile
manager should share their vision with the other team members so it can be
accepted – a key element for the well-functioning of the project.
Agile management also involves efficiently prioritizing activities, using
the Urgency-Important Matrix and taking relevant action if the tasks fit
into the first category (Crises Category). For the second category, goals and
planning, the manager will plan and delegate tasks, for the third category,
interruptions, the manager will delegate efficiently, and for the fourth
category, distractions, the manager should abandon all unnecessary activities
as these could interrupt optimal working flow.
Using 360 Feedback means integrated feedback on behalf of management,
collaborators, clients, with teams using Agile principles at the same time.
The main purpose of 360 Feedback is to obtain objective, but diversified
feedback, to build trust in the organization, to offer a consistent level of
transparency, to reduce the distance between the manager, collaborators
and other stakeholders, at a punctual and communicational level, as well as
for identifying the strengths and the development axis of the projects.
Management by walking around and listening (MBWAL) (Peters &
Waterman, 2006) represents one of the indispensable tools of Agile management
as this allows the manager to create and maintain a trustful relationship with
the team members and to eliminate the distance between him/her and other
collaborators, to promote bidirectional communication and less formality.
Another vital tool is one-to-one communication, which can last between 10
minutes to half an hour between team members and the manager. These short
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),
Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
50 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

meetings are held weekly with each team member, showing the manager`s
availability to listen, support and provide feedback (Schwaber, 2004).
For beginner managers, it is tempting to start a Gantt chart or PERT
map for coordinating the project, as this can provide project control. Even
though these instruments can analyze the progress of individual tasks and
help in pinning the ones that are finalized, comparing current completion
with planned tasks, they still lack the unpredictability tracking of the project.
As the team gathers information about the system and the client obtains
information about the team needs, a part of the marked tasks will become
irrelevant, while new tasks will be identified and will have to be included.
Therefore, the plan will change as far as structure and content are concerned.
More efficient planning strategy includes making detailed plans for the
following week, general plans for the next three months and very schematic
planning for more than three months. This Agile approach suggests that immediate-
task planning is an optimal approach to software development, at least.

RESEARCH METHODS

For the purposes of our exploratory qualitative research, we chose the case
study method. We chose an in-depth investigation of a working environment
where Agile project management methods are applied. Participant
observation was used as a tool for data collection purposes, specifically
for analyzing the attitudes, behaviors and processes of a distributed team
managed in the Agile framework. A series of declarations regarding the
Agile practices were gathered from the software development teams in
a distributed context (cross-teams). The organization we selected is an
IT organization, focused on delivering IT applications. The two software
development teams are situated in Bucharest and Brussels. The teams are
newly formed and they implemented Agile practices within the last year as
they are still in a transition period. The ownership of the organization is in
Brussels. The observations we conducted have the purpose of analyzing the
current state of implementation and usage of Agile practices, the needs of
Scrum teams within a multinational organization, and understanding the
ways in which responsibilities are being redefined.
The participants of this study include three development teams (between
four and nine members), one IT project manager (focusing on the transition
to Agile) and Human Resources personnel. The research interval was between
January 2017 and March 2017. In terms of data collection, the observations
grid was used four hours/day, by three trained researchers. Informal
conversations with developers were necessary for clarifying the findings

Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research

Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 51

we found from the observations and for a more complex understanding of

whether Scrum methodology and implementation is reflected in the attitudes
and perspectives of the software team. The trained researchers added notes
on the observation sheet with details reflecting the context and notes from
discussions with staff members.
The observations were specifically focused on the Bucharest teams and
their level of knowledge, implementation and stability of Agile practices and the
coordination practices. The three levels included in this evaluation refer to the
following concepts: Value (Level 1), Stability (Level 2), and Speed (Level 3). For the
first level, the drive is that of delivering value for both individuals and processes.
The business overall, as well as the IT department, collaborate to add value.
For the second level, stability was considered: product stability, for
instance, or consistent value flow within a specified time interval. Quality
is defined in the development process by the business as well as the IT
department (which define product value and final value).
The third level includes speed: the value needs to be delivered rapidly
and efficiently. The developers and the operations team need to share the
same purpose, to deliver value on a frequent basis, with low risk. The delivery
procedures are automated. The dates are collected and used systematically
as product feedback.
The observation grid included a series of dimensions that were established
to identify the level of applicability of Agile principles and Scrum practices. At
the general flow level, we analysed concepts such as: team, power delegation,
autonomy, ownership over processes, technical management, command
and control approach, Application Manager visibility and transparency,
planning, estimation, design session, decision making, collaboration between
development and business teams, understanding of business value, progress
and improvement measurement, user experience and acceptance criteria,
prioritized backlog, effort estimation, continuous improvement process, client
feedback, and team visualizing. The analysis included examining the decision
making flow and its specificity, how leadership is implemented, the execution
strategy, user experience and characteristics, product feedback and evaluation,
end product value, transparency and communication specifications, and
business model typology. The aspects that were investigated are relevant for
identifying whether Scrum implementation is successful within the analyzed
teams. As far as Agile practices are concerned, we concentrated one part of the
analysis of visual management and Scrum ceremonies.
For conducting this analysis, we also included a section dedicated to the
team platforms, analyzing a series of technical aspects: Cloud, applicative
configuration, IDE (Integrated Development Environment), implementation

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),

Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
52 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

processes, packaging, software production, system configuration, analysis

platforms, performance testing and unit tests.

ANALYSIS OF THE RESEARCH RESULTS

A series of observations over general flow were made as a result of this

qualitative research approach. We chose to regroup these observations
according to the fundamental concepts on which they are based. The
analysis shows that Agile project management implementation is not an
easy process. For reaching a stability level, the individuals and the teams,
in general, need to develop an Agile mind-set. As far as role redefinition is
concerned, the analysis shows a somewhat level of conformity of the roles
within a distributed context. A part of the Agile responsibilities cannot be
undertaken by the working groups as they are in a transition context. The
research lot included only the team members from Bucharest, so within the
Brussels team, the results could be different.
General flow observations: As far as the team is concerned, we noticed
that not all groups form a team – the development teams do not work together
to reach a common purpose. They do not represent a team as Agile defines
a team to be. Agile suggests that the team members share common values and
principles for functioning, while in the analyzed context, the cross teams face
this major drawback due to work distribution and geographical separation.
In terms of delegating power, we observed that the teams do not
have enough decisional involvement as far as tasks are concerned. When
team members do not have the authority to ask for changes, the team is
constrained to accept tasks and responsibilities as they are given, even if
these have a negative reflection on their daily activity.
Regarding autonomy, in most cases, Bucharest teams are not completely
autonomous due to the distributive factor, as they are dependent on the
defined processes in Brussels. The activity in distributed teams should follow
the same set of rules, principles and values. Otherwise, challenges may appear
when a group holds the decisional factor over the other one. Team autonomy is
suppressed in this context. If Bucharest teams had the capacity to get involved
in the decision making processes and, as such, gain independence in Scrum
sprints, these could be useful factors in team self-organization.
Further analysis showed that the Bucharest development teams do not
have a stable level of process knowledge and neither do they have a level
of autonomy over the property of the process knowledge. Therefore, once
again, the Romanian teams depend on the Brussels teams. According to Agile
principles, the software team should self-organize to end a task.

Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research

Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 53

In regard to technical management, although all teams have technical

capacities and skills, these are not included at a managerial level, as this level
involves the business area. Considering the fact that most applications have high
complexity from a technical perspective, as well as from a business perspective,
by using these, a superior design can be applied, and also information transfer
could become efficient enough to gradually coordinate these aspects.
By analyzing the aspects related to the command and control approach,
we observed that this dimension does not totally belong to the Bucharest
teams. When teams do not have the possibility to decide how to self-organize,
due to problematic communication or inappropriate informational exchange
or due to artificial dependencies, a series of problems appear as well as
duplicate tasks. This context is not compatible with Agile practices either.
Planning visibility and estimation practices were also analyzed. Bucharest
development teams are not involved in planning decisions neither in
estimation, design, nor feedback sessions. Most of the time, they do not have
access to the person handling the Application Manager, as the responsibilities
are not clearly set. When the development team from Bucharest is not
involved in this set of activities, the knowledge exchange opportunities are
wasted. Due to the lack of transparency the team`s growth is ceased, creating
a context in which the team from Bucharest performs some tasks for the
Brussels teams, drastically decreasing the chances to function independently.
Regarding the concept of value from a business perspective, we noticed
that a full understanding of this concept is still lacking. As far as measuring
progress and ongoing improvements are concerned, although the cross
teams engage in video-conference meetings on a daily basis, these do
not have a specific and stable way of measuring progress. Decisions and
improvements are often difficult to achieve as they are based on a series of
false assumptions.
We also analyzed the user experience and the acceptance criteria and in
almost all cases the dialogue between the development and business teams
is not guided by user experience. On the other hand, developers are being
given technical tasks which do not have clear acceptance criteria. Working
directly on technical tasks reduces the involvement levels in designing the
software and also in decision making. Without value based user experiences,
the chances of understanding a whole perspective decreases. Also, without
the acceptance criteria, defining and visualizing work becomes deficient: the
lack of automated acceptance testing, error protection, and unwanted items
in the production environment can emerge.
As far as task prioritization is concerned, we found that the Romanian
teams do not have full visibility over this, suggesting that a series of problems
can appear. Understanding the greater perspective can help developers
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),
Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
54 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

apply the existent information on current platforms. Also, these priorities are
essential for developers and the entire team in order to focus on the most
important aspects of the project.
Analyzing the team estimation efforts, we noticed that not all the
development teams are involved. Most of the times, the estimations are
not conducted by the individuals working on the product or the project. Not
incorporating user experience factors can cause many problems including
developers not being able to adopt pertinent solutions in the functionality
implementation. The estimation process should provide the capacity to guide
any team member in adequately leveraging tasks.
Moreover, as far as continuously optimizing processes are concerned,
most teams are not efficient with the activities and functional improvement
initiatives. This aspect is due to the lack of continuous optimization
processes which should be defined – such as retrospective analysis (within
meetings). Without these processes, teams do not have the capacity to
repair autonomous problems appearing at a local level, and several evolving
opportunities can be missed. This can lead to low morale at a collective level
due to frustrations and functional blockages (Sutherland, 2014).
As far as feedback is concerned, an analysis of the results showed that
this was not made visible to all team members. So, in terms of feedback
transparency, the teams are still at a beginner level and their ability to self-
regulate and learn from their own mistakes becomes difficult. Feedback and
dialogue help in building trustworthy relationships between the client and
the development teams, offering a sense of belonging when the work is
appreciated by others.
With regard to the level of propriety of the knowledge process flow and
that of team value, we observed that a Jira table was used. Even so, not all
the teams have access to it and, as such, knowledge over process is deficient.
The teams cannot visualize the entire process on the Jira table. When the
ownership over processes is not complete, introducing and implementing
improvements become difficult. A series of opportunities can be missed
and wasted, as longer tasks, blocked items and dependences interfere. In
the meantime, this challenging context is exposing the lack of understanding
roles: who is responsible for what in the process. This can lead to decisional
issues over the degree of work efficiency according to necessities.
Some observations were made over continuous delivery as well, where
we noticed that there is no visibility or collaboration between the Operational-
Development departments. In most teams, there is no visibility amongst
the developers and the operational department and this is a problem
mainly because, without this collaboration, enhancement opportunities

Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research

Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 55

over delivery process, software quality and non-functional requests such as

performance and implementation rapidity are lost.
Observations about the Agile management and principles. We noticed
that, at a company level, Agile managing principles have a fundamental basis
of implementation, but at the Scrum methodology level, as far as the roles are
concerned, there is still a consistent difference between the desirable agile
framework and the actual application. Perhaps this is due to the transition
period or is due to the fact that the teams are newly developed, but this
still needs to be investigated. Within the Scrum teams, there are only three
main roles (development team, Scrum Master and Product Owner), and their
understanding of these self-organizing roles is fundamental to the success of
the entire project. The development team represents a significant investment
of the business line, being essential to maximizing winnings (ROI).
On an executive level, Agile principles reached a somewhat level of
stability, as the managers use all the available tools for creating a comfortable
environment for development. At the Scrum team level, the principles cannot
be applied thoroughly, making team responsibilities and role definition hard
to define. As a result of our analysis, we concluded that, at the development
team level, there is no homogeneity for standard roles, each of them having
a more precise role. Also, the lack of self-regulated capacity at a regional level
could lead to undermining trust and ceasing cross-team cooperation.
Throughout our analysis, the lack of proper disclosure of information
regarding task setting and project evolution affects transparency that should
be present at all the levels of team engagement. Unfortunately, due to the
Scrum management processes being in the early stages of team adaptation,
communication and collaboration for achieving common objectives appear
to be challenging.
Regarding the Scrum sprint activities, challenges emerge during
actual implementation. Only a part of Scrum activities can be successfully
implemented considering the distribution of the teams` authority: the
development teams from Bucharest depend to a large extent on the Brussels
teams. Scrum team members are not involved in the planning, estimation,
and decision-making sessions. Even though sprint planning appears to be
present, with the Brussels team describing specific functionalities required for
the final product, full access to the backlog is not possible for the Bucharest
team. Moreover, the Scrum team (the developers) from Romania does not
have the authority to choose subsets of tasks for the next sprint, as these
are chosen for them by the Brussels team. Even though Scrum meetings are
conducted with the Brussels team through video conferences, these are not
necessarily conducted on a daily basis, unless needed when unexpected
requirements interfere. Considering the lack of the decisional factor at the
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),
Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
56 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

team level, critical or constructive retrospective sessions are absent, at least

at a local level. As there is no clearly defined method for measuring progress,
optimization criteria cannot be established. As far as the developer`s role is
concerned, Scrum methodology involves a high degree of authority. What we
noticed is that most of the tasks are set by others and not by the developer.
Not having ownership over the set of tasks impedes the developer to perform
properly, not being able to have a position over the equity and distribution of
the task set, and withholding the possibility to engage in continuous learning.
The role of the Scrum Master can coincide with the role of the line manager
or with the role of the IT manager, whose task is to supervise and make sure
that the transition finality and implementation of a project are according to
plan. This is the case for the newly formed teams which are in a transition
process. From a traditional perspective, the role of the project manager is to
coordinate the entire project and to maintain its planning within the initial
parameters. The project manager is responsible for developing and maintaining
the relationships with the project stakeholders, for setting and delegating tasks
and for creating a working calendar. The working team, in this context, is not
accountable for project failure. This aspect represents one of the main value
pillars of the Scrum methodology, as the project manager role is completely
eliminated, with the responsibilities being shared by the Product Owner, Scrum
Master and the development team (Stellman & Greene, 2014). However, in
new teams such as the ones we investigated, four roles were identified: project
manager, developers, Scrum Master and Product Owner.
Within IT departments, and within the software production environment,
the IT project manager has a similar role to the Application Manager who
does not have the possibility of maintaining a status for the KPIs, due to not
having access to budget planning. This is why the involvement of a project
management cell is useful to maintain this activity. We noticed that a part
of these attributions are given to an external team, not to the Scrum team.
Therefore, as far as redefining responsibilities is concerned, within new
Scrum teams, we can conclude that the motto is that of delivering value
(Level 1). As the maturity level of the Scrum teams is relatively low, a plan
of action is necessary for training Scrum teams into the Agile mind-set: for
working independently, for self-organization, and for cooperation purposes.
In the current context, responsibility management cannot be undertaken
by developers or by the Scrum Master or Product Owner, as the adopted
management framework is Scrum-Waterfall. Even though the Scrum Master
and Product Owner coordination involvement exists, at the technical, as well
as at the functional level, the teams are still in a transition period, with global
project coordination being conducted by the IT project manager and by

Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research

Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 57

a project management team which has the responsibility for managing tasks
and following their development and implementation progress.
It can be concluded that the Agile methodology implemented within the
IT project management presented in this paper is still at its infancy level. Even
though Agile project management first emerged as a response to the highly
competitive and dynamic environment determining organizations to focus
on their internal strategic agility to cope with external factors by efficiently
managing projects, the case study presented herein showed many challenges
with respect to self-organization, decisional factors and collaboration
between distributed Scrum teams. Moreover, a deficient collaboration
between the distributed developer teams and with the Product Owner lead
to misunderstandings in product deliveries and a long-lasting functionality
production process, which are contradicting two of the core principles of
the Agile philosophy: fast delivery of functional software and collaboration
between developers and clients.

DISCUSSION

Agile principles and Scrum methodology were analysed within distributed

teams. There are communication risks, production and efficiency risks at
stake, and also cultural and leadership elements that need to be considered
in future research. Also, quantitative research methods should be included,
such as surveys, in order to identify what are the perceptions of team
members over these types of principles and how these perceptions affect
their attitude and behaviors to any kind of Agile and Scrum efforts. For Agile
to work, an agile mind-set should be developed at a team level, and this does
not refer exclusively to training and keeping Scrum methods active, but more
on understanding why openness, cooperation, accountability and ownership
represent important factors in reaching project success. As Theocharis,
Kuhrmann, Münch and Diebold (2015) emphasized, the Scrum methods used
in software development projects are set especially to provide fast reactions
to dynamic and changing demands from clients, and proper monitoring is
expected in order to make the necessary adjustments. Within our case
study, no monitoring of the project progress was made and, as such, proper
optimization of processes was lacking.
In the software industry, particularly within distributed teams, the
challenge to understand and to implement the methodology seems to become
a paradigm. In this context, we state that the human factor and delivering an
integrated environment are key elements that still need an attentive and unitary
implementation within the analyzed segment. This implementation needs

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),

Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
58 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

a qualitative guide, as well as training and a specific period in which information,

practices, principles and experiences are understood and integrated.
Also, the Agile project management implementation is challenging
from a role definition perspective, as the results showed that there was
still a tendency to ask for the help of the IT project manager (traditional
implementation) for guiding transitory projects. This manager`s roles and
attributions are limited considering the lack of homogeneous knowledge
within the project. Role definition is dependent on team maturity and on
finalizing transition projects that still require specific traditional guidance.
When distributed teamwork organization is present, we must consider the
characteristics of collaboration and communication between team members.
Efficient communication is needed when teams work jointly on projects, but
merely setting common objectives is not enough for enhancing collaboration
between team members. According to Vlaar, Van Fenema, and Tiwari (2008),
the quality of interaction appears as the most crucial factor for successful
collaboration and communication between team members working in
software development. As far as our research results are concerned, client
feedback is not visible for the Bucharest teams and deficient communication
is present between the Product Owner and the developers.
From a broader perspective, this methodology may appear to be readily
applicable, but its implementation can be considered linear (Kenneth, 2012).
Modus operandi is essential, as far as cohesiveness and clarity are concerned,
and this should be implemented at a functional and operational level over all the
projects, for allowing improvement at the production efficiency level, as well as at
the product delivery level and at reducing the time in which these are generated.
The increasing spiral of the process inflation is responsible for at least a part
of this failure, even if it is emerging on the basis of good intentions. The Agile
principles were created as a means for helping teams to step out of the process
inflation and for focusing on easy techniques to reach different objectives
(Martin & Martin, 2006). Scrum methodology, in particular, cannot be applied
everywhere, but it can be a basis for supporting complex development efforts.

Research limitations
The limits of this research paper include the non-homogeneous character of
the teams being evaluated. Half of the Scrum teams are working in Bucharest
offices, while half work in Brussels. From this perspective, we analyzed
exclusively the Bucharest teams. Therefore our information access was limited:
we did not have a holistic perspective of the project management processes
and over the decisional factors specifically. Access was restricted to the team
from Brussels and, as such, we were only able to gather some level of data
Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research
Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 59

from the Bucharest teams. Also, no access to spontaneous communication

between the distributed teams was granted: the teams communicate with
each other for solving specific tasks, but the communication flow and the
content they share was not available to us for analysis for our research
purposes. Work-related tasks were also difficult to follow as the tasks were
being distributed regionally and, considering we did not have access to the
backlog, we based our notes on what the team members communicated.
Furthermore, the collection of data was difficult because the software
developers were not very open, especially at the beginning, and transparency
was difficult to attain. Understanding the level of implementation of
Agile principles and Scrum methodology is challenging when a proper
understanding of the technical language does not exist, which represented
another limit of this research. Additional explanations were required by the
team of researchers when they were confronted with technical concepts
they did not know.
Therefore, the flow of the working tasks was challenging to identify, as
they were distributed regionally and full access was not granted in this sense.
In this type of research, observing task flow management is very important.
The results of this research cannot be extended or generalized outside the
context of the case study that was presented in this paper.

CONCLUSION

The primary purpose of developers and development teams in general is

to deliver functional software within an optimum timeframe that can bring
the highest value to all the stakeholders involved, including employees and
clients. However, most projects fail on a general level or do not manage to
deliver the desired value.
Our research showed many methodological and practical aspects
regarding the implementation of Scrum methodology, including the fact that
distributed teams require continuous orientation and involvement on behalf
of the management level so as its evolution can become progressive towards
homogenous practices. Irrespective of the analyzed environment, the Agile
framework brings a series of benefits to projects and general mind-sets, as it is
focused on people and on delivering value, being an iterative and incremental
process. Agile management promotes receptivity, value and collaboration
within and between teams, ensuring the development of a value-added
framework in which tasks are set only by urgency and importance factors.
To conclude, the research results showed that teams have a collective
mentality built around Agile principles, focused on people and result, which

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),

Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
60 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

could result, in the future, in an identical plurality on a mind-set level that

could overcome regional and cultural challenges, but this still needs to be
investigated. Training practices have the capacity to grow teams from the
concept level of value, in which collaboration is focused on the business and
information technology lines, where constant feedback flows are present, and
transparency is critical. At this stage, Scrum teams can reach the point at which
they are focused on frequent delivery of value, with low risk over automation
delivery and over using dates systematically as a way of gathering product
feedback. As the results showed, ongoing improvements need to be made.
The declarative evaluation that we conducted over Scrum team members
from Bucharest did not include measuring the performance of teams within
the distributed context we investigated. However, it offered, however,
a general view over the evolution of implementing Agile principles in project
management and, of Scrum methodology, evaluating the transformative flow
of redefining responsibilities in a distributed context.
The methodological foundations of Agile and Scrum have started
gaining popularity in the software industry and continuous research over
implementation techniques should be conducted. As far as this aspect
is concerned, not all software production companies follow the same
implementation model, as this is dependent on the organizational culture of
the business and local factors as well.

References
Anderson, D. J. (2000). KANBAN. Enclenchez le Moteur d’Amélioration
Continue de votre IT. USA: Blue Hole Press.
Aubry, C. (2011). SCRUM. Le guide pratique de la méthode Agile la plus
populaire (2nd ed). Malakoff, France: Dunod Editions.
Beecham, S., Baddoo, N., Hall, T., Robinson, H., & Sharp, H. (2008). Motivation
in software engineering: A systematic literature review. Information
Software Technology Journal, 50(9-10), 860-878.
Cervone, H. F. (2011). Understanding agile project management methods
using Scrum. OCLC Systems & Services, 27(1), 18-22.
DeMarco, T. & Lister, T. (2013). Peopleware: Productive Projects and Teams
(3rd ed.). New Jersey: Addison-Wesley.
Denning, S. (2016). How to make the whole organization « Agile». Strategy &
Leadership, 44(4), 10-17.
França, A.C.C., da Silva, F.Q.B., & de Sousa Mariz, L.M.R. (2010). An empirical
study on the relationship between the use of agile practices and the
success of Scrum projects. Association for Computing Machinery,
ESEM’10, September 16-17, 2010. Italy: Bolzano-Bozen.
Kenneth, R. S. (2012). Essential Scrum: A Practical Guide to the Most Popular
Agile Process. (1st ed.). Michigan: Addison-Wesley Professional.

Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research

Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)
 Carmen Novac, Raluca-Silvia Ciochină / 61

Kerr, J. M. & Hunter, R. (1993). Inside RAD: How to Build a Fully Functional
System in 90 Days or Less. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lehnen, J., Schmidt, T.S. & Herstatt, C. (2016). Bringing agile project
management into lead user projects. International Journal of Product
Development, 21(2-3), 212-232.
Martin, J. (1991). Rapid Application Development. Indianapolis, USA:
Macmillan Publishing Co.
Martin, R.C., & Martin, M. (2006). Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in
C#. Upper Saddle River, USA: Prentice Hall.
Messager Rota, V. (2010). Gestion de Projet Agile. Paris: Groupe Eyrolles.
Misra, S.C., Kumar, V. & Kumar, U. (2010). Identifying some critical changes
required in adopting agile practices in traditional software development
projects. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,
27(4), 451-474.
Peters, T., & Waterman, R.H. (2006). In Search of Excellence: Lessons from
America`s Best Run Companies. New York, USA: Collins Business Essentials.
Rasnacis, A., & Berzisa, S. (2015). Adaptation of agile project management
methodology for project team. Information Technology and Management
Science, 18(1), 122-128.
Saxena, A., & Burmann, J. (2014). Factors affecting team performance in
globally distributed setting. Association for Computing Machinery,
SIGMIS-CPR’14, May 29-31, Singapore, 25-33.
Schwaber, K. (2004). Agile Project Management with Scrum. Redmond, WA:
Microsoft Press.
Stellmann, A., & Greene, J. (2014). Learning Agile. Understanding Scrum, XP,
Lean and Kanban. New York, USA: O`Reilly Media Inc.
Sutherland, J. (2014). The Art of Doing Twice the Work in Half the Time. New
York, USA: Crown Business.
Theocharis, G., Kuhrmann, M., Münch, J., & Diebold, P. (2015, December
2-4). Is Water-Scrum-Fall reality? On the use of agile and traditional
development practices. In P. Abrahamsson, L. Corral, M. Oivo, & B. Russo
(Eds.), Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. Paper presented
at the Proceedings of the 16th International Conference PROFES, Bolzano,
Italy (pp. 149-166). Springer. Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
Vickoff, J. P. (2009). Méthode AGILE. Les meilleures pratiques. Compréhension
et mise en œuvre. Vanves, Hauts-de-Seine: Editions QI.
Vlaar, P.W.L., Van Fenema, P.C., & Tiwari, V. (2008). Co-creating understanding
and value in distributed work: How members of onsite and offshore vendor
teams give, make, demand, or break sense. MIS Quarterly, 32(2), 227-255.

Online sources
www.Agilemanifesto.org
www.scrum.org

Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI),

Volume 14, Issue 4, 2018: 43-62
62 / Challenges of Applying Agile Principles and Values to IT Project Management

Abstrakt
Część teoretyczna niniejszego artykułu koncentruje się na analizie makro filozofii
systemu Agile, jednej z najpopularniejszych ram zarządzania projektami w branży
oprogramowania. Druga część artykułu zawiera studium przypadku analizujące
praktyki Agile w ramach korporacji na poziomie produkcji oprogramowania. Jeśli
chodzi o metodologię, badania jakościowe przeprowadzono na podstawie studium
przypadku zespołu w kontekście rozproszonym (“cross-team”). Obserwacja uczestników
była wykorzystywana jako narzędzie do zbierania danych o osobach i procesach
w zespołach. Celem badań było przeanalizowanie obecnego stanu wdrożenia, korzyści
i wyzwań wynikających z zastosowania platformy zarządzania projektami Agile, a także
potrzeb zespołów programistycznych w ramach wielonarodowej firmy. Jednocześnie
w artykule przeanalizowano redefinicję ról, stosując ramy zarządzania projektami Agile
w ramach organizacji pracy zespołu rozproszonego. Badanie ma na celu wskazanie
przyczyn leżących u podstaw wyboru metody zarządzania Agile zamiast Lean
Management w branży rozwoju oprogramowania, ze szczególnym uwzględnieniem
poziomu wdrożenia metodologii Agile/Scrum i zasad w rozproszonych zespołach.
Słowa kluczowe: Agile, Scrum, IT, zarządzanie projektami.

Biographical notes

Carmen Novac teaches at the College of Communication and Public Relations

at the National University of Political Studies and Public Administration
in Bucharest. She has participated as an expert in various national and
international projects such as Instruments, Analysis and Screening Techniques
for the Regional Policy Institution at the European Integration Office (2005),
Developing entrepreneurial competencies through transnational transfer of
good practices and professional training of Romanian entrepreneurs – STEPS
(2011-2013), HER – Entrepreneurship for Human Resources (2012-2013). She
is interested in researching professional performance evaluations, but she
also focuses her research on personnel management, project management,
employee motivation, and innovative teaching methods.

Raluca Ciochină teaches Digital Marketing and eBusiness online at the

College of Communication and Public Relations at the National University of
Political Studies and Public Administration in Bucharest. Her research focuses
on online social networks and user behavior, human resources management
and online recruitment and selection. Her position as an evaluator within the
national project called EHR – Entrepreneurship for Human Resources (2012-
2013) raised her interest in researching sustainable entrepreneurship and
organizational communication techniques for employee engagement.

Exploring Management Through Qualitative Research

Marta Najda-Janoszka, Corina Daba-Buzoianu (Eds.)