Partnering som arbetssätt har funnits i Sverige sedan slutet av 90-talet och kommit att bli allt vanligare, särskilt inom offentligt byggande. Arbetssättet är en reaktion på det traditionella förfarandet som kritiserats för att vara fragmentiserat och innebära dåligt utnyttjande av kunskap och skapa många konflikter. I en integrerad organisation och med en iterativ process utvecklar och genomför alla aktörer projektet med full transparens i alla delprocesser i syfte att maximera värdet av slutprodukten och sätta kundens behov i centrum. ByggDialog är ett företag som från start specialiserat sig på partnering och som organiserar och leder produktbestämningsskedet ofta kallat Fas 1, varefter man också samordnar alla entreprenörer och utför byggentreprenaden med egen arbetskraft. ByggDialog vill utveckla sitt arbete i Fas 1 och skapa en så flödeseffektiv process som möjligt för att komma till produktion inom rimlig tid. Detta är viktigt då man strävar efter effektivitet i allmänhet men också för att det ska vara möjligt att med god säkerhet och små avvikelser prognostisera resursbehov, tillväxttakt och resultat. Flödeseffektivitet är ett begrepp hämtat från Lean-teorin som har sitt ursprung i Toyotas bilfabriker. Det handlar om att skapa en process där icke värdeskapande aktiviteter elimineras och fokus ligger på densiteten i värdeöverföringen till produkten och dess flöde. Syftet med denna rapport är att applicera dessa teorier på ByggDialogs processer i Fas 1 och att genom intervjuer med personer med stor erfarenhet kartlägga icke värdeskapande aktiviteter i Fas 1. I studien ingick också att föreslå åtgärder till förbättrad flödeseffektivitet. Det gjordes även en ansats till att beräkna flödeseffektiviteten i ett antal genomförda projekt i syfte att utreda möjligheten till lämplig indikator för företagets förbättringsarbete av Fas 1. Det visade sig att flödeseffektiviteten i Fas 1 sammanfattningsvis kan påverkas positivt genom bland annat öppenhet, integrerade organisationer, standardiserade arbetssätt, iterativa projekteringsmetoder och tydlig projektledning. En indikator för flödeseffektivitet som beaktar kvoten mellan värdeskapande tid och genomloppstid genom BTA visade sig vara komplex att ta fram. En framkomlig väg är dock att endast låta indikatorn avspegla genomloppstid genom BTA eller produktionskostnad. Fördjupade studier rekommenderas ByggDialog för att söka den mest användbara metoden för uppföljning och mätning av effektiviteten i Fas 1. / Partnering as a working method has existed in Sweden since the late 90s and has become increasingly common, especially in public construction. The way of working is a reaction to the traditional procedure that has been criticized for being fragmented and misleading knowledge and creating many conflicts. In an integrated organization and with an iterative process, all players develop and implement the project with full transparency in all sub-processes to maximize the value of the product and put the customer's needs in focus. ByggDialog is a company that from the start specializes in partnering and who organizes and leads the design phase often called Phase 1, after which one also coordinates all contractors and performs the construction with their own workforce. ByggDialog wants to develop their work in Phase 1 and create a process as flow-efficient as possible to reach production within a reasonable time. This is important as one strives for efficiency in general, but also for it to be possible to forecast resource needs, growth rates and results with good precision and small deviations. Flow efficiency is a concept derived from Lean theory that originates from Toyota's car factories. It is about creating a process where non-value-creating activities are eliminated, and the focus is on the density of the value transfer to the product and its flow. The purpose of this report is to apply these theories to ByggDialog's processes in Phase 1 and to survey non-value-creating activities in Phase 1 through interviews with people with great experience of Phase 1. The study also included proposing measures for improved flow efficiency. An effort was also made to calculate the flow efficiency in several completed projects to investigate the possibility of an appropriate indicator for the company's improvement work on Phase 1. In summary, it turned out that flow efficiency in Phase 1 can be positively affected by openness, integrated organizations, standardized working methods, iterative design methods and distinct project management. An indicator of flow efficiency that considers the ratio of value-creating time and throughput divided by BTA proved to be too complex to develop. A viable route, however, is to only let the indicator reflect the throughput divided by BTA or production cost. In-depth studies are recommended for ByggDialog to seek the most useful method for monitoring and measuring the effectiveness of Phase 1.

The aim of this study is to investigate whether a combination of agile system development methodologies (ASDMs) and project management methodologies (PMMs) can be used to develop a hybrid APMM that will have the ability to deliver information technology (IT) projects successfully in a constantly changing business and project environment. To achieve this objective, a literature review was conducted on the relatively well–established ASDMs by firstly defining a SDM and an ASDM. Each ASDM and its effectiveness are described, after which ASDMs in general are evaluated by considering their area of application, advantages and disadvantages. A comparison is then done of the seven different ASDMs using the four elements of an SDM (Huisman & Iivari, 2006:32) to emphasise some of the main similarities and differences amongst the different ASDMs. The seven ASDMs investigated in this study are Dynamic System Development Methodology, Scrum, Extreme Programming, Feature Driven Development, Crystal ASDMs ? Crystal Clear and Crystal Orange in particular, Adaptive Software Development and Lean Development. A literature review was also conducted on two structured and relatively well–established PMMs, PMBOK and PRINCE2, and a relatively new PMM called Agile Project Management. Each PMM is evaluated by considering their area of application, advantages, disadvantages and integration with other methodologies, after which a comparison is made of the different PMMs. The research was conducted by following a mixed methods research plan, which included the mixed methods research paradigm (combination of the interpretive research paradigm and the positivistic research paradigm), research methods (design science, case study and survey), quantitative and qualitative data–collection techniques (interviews and questionnaires), and dataanalysis techniques (cross–case and statistical). The reasons that projects fail and critical project success factors were studied and summarised to form the critical project success criteria, which were used to create the agile project success criteria. The ASDM best practice and PMM best practice frameworks were created by identifying whether a certain ASDM or PMM would satisfy a specific agile project success factor (APSF) of the agile project success criteria. The findings of each APSF in the respective frameworks were used as a foundation to develop a hybrid APMM (ver. 0) that would address the agile project success criteria. The hybrid APMM (ver. 0) was developed interpretively using design science (research approach) and constructivism by combining the strengths, addressing the weaknesses and bridging the gaps identified in the frameworks. The hybrid APMM (ver. 0) was then evaluated and improved by conducting an interpretive case study, which entailed interviewing participants from large and small organisations. Once the qualitative data collected had been analysed using cross–case analysis, the findings were incorporated in order to create an improved hybrid APMM (ver. 1). The hybrid APMM (ver. 1) too was evaluated and improved by conducting a survey, which entailed administering questionnaires to various respondents in order to collect quantitative and qualitative data. The findings of the statistical analysis of the data were also used to improve the hybrid APMM (ver. 1), resulting in the final hybrid APMM (ver. 2). This study demonstrates that a combination of ASDMs and PMMs can be used to develop a hybrid APMM with the ability to deliver IT projects in a constantly changing project and business environment. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Computer Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012.

The aim of this study is to investigate whether a combination of agile system development methodologies (ASDMs) and project management methodologies (PMMs) can be used to develop a hybrid APMM that will have the ability to deliver information technology (IT) projects successfully in a constantly changing business and project environment. To achieve this objective, a literature review was conducted on the relatively well–established ASDMs by firstly defining a SDM and an ASDM. Each ASDM and its effectiveness are described, after which ASDMs in general are evaluated by considering their area of application, advantages and disadvantages. A comparison is then done of the seven different ASDMs using the four elements of an SDM (Huisman & Iivari, 2006:32) to emphasise some of the main similarities and differences amongst the different ASDMs. The seven ASDMs investigated in this study are Dynamic System Development Methodology, Scrum, Extreme Programming, Feature Driven Development, Crystal ASDMs ? Crystal Clear and Crystal Orange in particular, Adaptive Software Development and Lean Development. A literature review was also conducted on two structured and relatively well–established PMMs, PMBOK and PRINCE2, and a relatively new PMM called Agile Project Management. Each PMM is evaluated by considering their area of application, advantages, disadvantages and integration with other methodologies, after which a comparison is made of the different PMMs. The research was conducted by following a mixed methods research plan, which included the mixed methods research paradigm (combination of the interpretive research paradigm and the positivistic research paradigm), research methods (design science, case study and survey), quantitative and qualitative data–collection techniques (interviews and questionnaires), and dataanalysis techniques (cross–case and statistical). The reasons that projects fail and critical project success factors were studied and summarised to form the critical project success criteria, which were used to create the agile project success criteria. The ASDM best practice and PMM best practice frameworks were created by identifying whether a certain ASDM or PMM would satisfy a specific agile project success factor (APSF) of the agile project success criteria. The findings of each APSF in the respective frameworks were used as a foundation to develop a hybrid APMM (ver. 0) that would address the agile project success criteria. The hybrid APMM (ver. 0) was developed interpretively using design science (research approach) and constructivism by combining the strengths, addressing the weaknesses and bridging the gaps identified in the frameworks. The hybrid APMM (ver. 0) was then evaluated and improved by conducting an interpretive case study, which entailed interviewing participants from large and small organisations. Once the qualitative data collected had been analysed using cross–case analysis, the findings were incorporated in order to create an improved hybrid APMM (ver. 1). The hybrid APMM (ver. 1) too was evaluated and improved by conducting a survey, which entailed administering questionnaires to various respondents in order to collect quantitative and qualitative data. The findings of the statistical analysis of the data were also used to improve the hybrid APMM (ver. 1), resulting in the final hybrid APMM (ver. 2). This study demonstrates that a combination of ASDMs and PMMs can be used to develop a hybrid APMM with the ability to deliver IT projects in a constantly changing project and business environment. / Thesis (Ph.D. (Computer Science))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2012.

This paper is a degree project on the C-level, 15 points at University West, Department of Business and IT dept. Informatics. This study is about agile methodology and its impact on IT projects. Requirements management is a process within an IT project, where customer has certain requirements that must be met by an IT system. The difference between the traditional and agile development is in the requirements management process and it can cause problems in a project. Requirements change during IT projects and to manage requirements, agile principles apply. Specification and planning in the waterfall model is time consuming. Working agile means to have close contact with the client. This minimizes the risk of project failure. With agile methods, functions can be developed at a faster rate and the customer receives prompt delivery. There are currently several different methods for systems development and project management. Some are based on research, others are new and some have been around a long time in the IT world. This work has identified customer involvement; Risk Reduction and Delivery which contribute to several projects fail under traditional systems. Agile methods are flexible, agile and welcome change and the customer will be able to steer the project. Agile methods have however provided the opportunity for developers to more quickly deliver functionality to the customer. / Detta arbete är ett examensarbete på C-nivå, 15 poäng vid Högskolan Väst, Institutionen för ekonomi och IT avd. informatik. Denna studie handlar om agila metodiken och dess inverkan på IT-projekt. Kravhantering är en process inom ett IT-projekt, där kund har vissa krav som måste uppfyllas av ett IT-system. Skillnaden mellan det traditionella och agila utvecklingsmetoder ligger i kravhantering process och det kan orsaka problem i ett projekt. Krav förändras under IT-projekt och för att hantera kraven bör agila principer tillämpas. Kravspecifikation och planering inom vattenfallsmodellen är tidskrävande. Att jobba agilt innebär att ha nära kontakt med beställaren. Därmed minimerar det risken för projektets misslyckande. Med agila metoder, kan funktionerna utvecklas i en snabbare takt och kunden får snabb leverans. Det finns idag flera olika metoder för systemutveckling och projektledning. Vissa är baserade på forskning, andra är nya och vissa har funnits en lång tid i IT-världen. Arbetet har identifierat kundinvolvering, Riskreducering och Leveranstid vilka bidra till att flera projekt misslyckas under traditionell systemutveckling. Agila metoder är flexibla, smidiga och välkomnar förändring och kunden kommer att kunna styra projektet. Agila metoder har däremot gett möjlighet för utvecklarna att på ett snabbare sätt leverera funktioner till kunden.

In today’s volatile market, retail companies struggle for survival as they have to become more flexible and dynamic. Thus, they change the organization, implementing agile methods. However agile is more than a set of practices and therefore the implementation process needs to be accompanied by organizational development to accomplish successful organizational change. This has been shown to be difficult for retail companies due to their size, defined silos, comfortable long-established ways of doing things and strong bureaucratic hierarchical culture. This thesis studies the implementation of agile in a large-scale retail organization and uses organizational development as a tool for deeper understanding and analysis. The study has been conducted at one of Sweden's leading retail organizations, where the research design contains two phases: one pre-study phase where a deeper understanding of the company and the transformation is achieved resulting in a problem formulation and the second phase where the main study is directed by the problem formulation and leads to an analysis and conclusion. The analysis is based on empirics gathered from three separate teams and is divided into three interconnected change phases, “Preparation”, “Implementation” and “Desired state”. From the analysis in the preparation and implementation phases; strengths and challenges within the organization were identified. Together with a maturity model to evaluate the implemented agile practices and an organizational culture assessment instrument to evaluate people and culture, the strengths and challenges were then used to estimate their current state and compare it to their future desired state. In conclusion, the strengths of the case company were that, when implemented, the observed teams incorporated the agile ceremonies and ways of work successfully. However, there were challenges identified in relation to resistance within management, there was a general lack of support from the sponsors and confusion about the managerial roles. There was also a lack of communication, cooperation and synchronizations between teams. / I dagens flyktiga marknader kämpar företag inom dagligvaruhandeln för att överleva då de måste bli mer flexibla och dynamiska i deras strategi. För att bemöta detta ändrar företagen sin strategi genom implementering av agila metoder. Emellertid handlar att vara agil inte bara om att använda sig av olika verktyg och övningar för att ändra hur man arbetar, utan för att implementeringen av agila metoder ska vara lyckad, måste den följas med av en lyckad organisationsförändring. En sådan agil implementering och organisationsförändring har visats vara komplicerad i just dagligvaruhandeln på grund av organisationernas ofta stora storlek, definierade silos, komfortabla gamla traditioner och starka hierarkiska organisationskultur. Denna uppsats studerar implementationen av agilt i ett storskaligt företag inom dagligvaruhandeln och använder sig av organisationsutveckling som ett verktyg för att nå en djupare förståelse och analys. Analysen är uppdelad i tre olika sammanhängande faser “Förberedelse”, “Implementering”, och “Önskat Tillstånd”. Empirin analysen är baserad på kommer från tre olika separata team, vilka är i olika faser av den agila transformationen. I förberedelse- och implementeringsfaserna identifieras styrkor och utmaningar hos företaget. Dessa används sedan tillsammans med en mognadhetsmodell, för att evaluera de agila tillvägagångssätten samt ett bedömningsinstrument för organisationskultur, för att evaluera personer och kultur, i syfte att sedan utvärdera det nuvarande tillståndet i jämförelse med det önskade. Sammanfattningsvis lyckades de observerade teamen att framgångsrikt implementera de agila metoderna och arbetssätten. Däremot identifierades flera utmaningar i relation till motstånd inom management. Det fanns en generell förvirring kring chefs rollernas betydelse och det saknades stöd från ledningsgruppen. Slutligen identifierades även förbättringsområden inom kommunikation, samarbete och synkronisering mellan olika team.