Logo PTI
Polish Information Processing Society
Logo FedCSIS

Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 21

Proceedings of the 2020 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems

Harmonizing IT Frameworks and Agile Methods: Challenges and Solutions for the case of COBIT and Scrum

, , , ,

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2020F47

Citation: Proceedings of the 2020 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 21, pages 709719 ()

Full text

Abstract. Information Technology (IT) is a complex domain. In order to properly manage IT related processes, several frameworks including ITIL (Information Technologies Infrastructure Library), COBIT (Control OBjectives for Information and related Technologies), IT Service CMMI (IT Service Capability Maturity Model) and many others have emerged in recent decades. Meanwhile, the prevalence of Agile methods has increased, posing the coexistence of Agile approach with different IT frameworks already adopted in organizations. More specifically, the pursuit of being agile in the area of digitalization pushes organizations to go for agile transformation while preserving full compliance to IT frameworks for the sake of their survival. The necessity for this coexistence, however, brings its own challenges and solutions for harmonizing the requirements of both parties. In this paper, we focus on harmonizing the requirements of COBIT and Scrum in a same organization, which is especially challenging when a full compliance to COBIT is expected. Therefore, this study aims to identifying the challenges of and possible solutions for the coexistence of Scrum and COBIT (version 4.1 in this case) in an organization, by considering two case studies: one from the literature and the case of Akbank delivered in this study. Thus, it extends the corresponding previous case study from two points: adds one more case study to enrich the results from the previous case study and provides more opportunity to make generalization by considering two independent cases.


  1. N. Ozkan, "Risks Challenges and Issues in a Possible Scrum and COBIT Marriage", Software Engineering Conference (APSEC) 2015 Asia-Pacific, pp. 111-118, 2015.
  2. N. Ozkan, A. Tarhan and C. Kucuk, “Scrum at Scale in a COBIT Compliant Environment: The Case of Turkiye Finans IT”, XP2017, 2017.
  3. N. Ozkan, N., “Scrum Integrated SDLC Processes of Turkiye Finans IT in a COBIT Compliant Environment”, Turkish National Software Engineering Symposium (UYMS), pp. 126-134, 2017.
  4. "Cobit 4.1", ISACA, 2007.
  5. "COBIT Global Regulatory and Legislative Recognition", ISACA, 2014.
  6. "13th annual state of agile survey", 2019, [online] Available: https://stateofagile.com/#ufh-i-521251909-13th-annual-state-of-agile-report/473508
  7. T. Dingsøyr and N. B. Moe, "Towards principles of large-scale agile development", International Conference on Agile Software Development, 2014.
  8. B. Boehm and R. Turner, "Using risk to balance agile and plan-driven methods", Computer., vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 57-66, 2003.
  9. V. Kannan, S. Jhajharia, S. and S. Verma, “Agile vs waterfall: A Comparative Analysis”, International Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR), vol. 3, no. 10, pp. 2680-2686, 2014.
  10. D. A. Aguillar, I. Murakami, P. Manso, and P. T. Aquino, “Small Brazilian Business and IT Governance: Viability and Case Study”, Information Technology for Management. Ongoing Research and Development, pp. 173-193, 2017.
  11. J. Sutherland and K. Schwaber, "The Scrum guide. the definitive guide to Scrum: The rules of the game", 2017, [online] Available: https://www.scrum.org/resources/scrum-guide.
  12. N. Ozkan and C. Kucuk, "A Systematic Approach to Project Related Concepts of Scrum", Revista de Management Comparat International, vol. 17, no. 4, 2016.
  13. T. Clear, “Documentation and agile methods: striking a balance”, SIGCSE Bull, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 12–13, 2003.
  14. S. Nerur, R. Mahapatra and G. Mangalaraj, "Challenges of migrating to agile methodologies", Commun. ACM, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 72-78, 2005.
  15. N. Ozkan, and A. Tarhan, “An Investigation into Increased Agility by Balancing Agile and Traditional Process Approaches”, Turkish National Software Engineering Symposium (UYMS), 2018.
  16. G. Parry, L. Newnes, and X. Huang, “Goods, products and services”, Service design and delivery, pp. 19-29, Springer: Boston, MA, 2011.
  17. K. Schwaber, "Agile Project Management with Scrum", Redmond: Microsoft Press, 2004.
  18. PMBOK Guide, Project Management Institute, 2013.
  19. "COBIT Control Practices: Guidance to Achieve Control Objectives for Successful IT Governance 2nd edn", ISACA, 2007.
  20. K. Beck et al., "Agile manifesto", 2001, [online] Available: http://agilemanifesto.org.
  21. N. Sekitoleko, et. al., “Technical dependency challenges in large-scale agile software development”, International Conference on Agile Software Development, pp. 46-61, 2014.
  22. M. C Paulk, “Agile methodologies and process discipline”, Institute for Software Research, pp.15-18, 2002.
  23. C. D. O Melo, C. Santana, and F. Kon, “Developers motivation in agile teams”, 38th Euromicro Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, pp. 376-383, 2012.
  24. R. Hoda, P. Kruchten, J. Noble and S. Marshall, "Agility in context", ACM Sigplan Notices, vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 74-88, 2010.
  25. M. Stoica, M. Mircea and B. Ghilic-Micu, "Software development: Agile vs. traditional", Inform. Econ., vol. 17, pp. 64-76, 2013.
  26. B. Boehm, and R. Turner, Balancing Agility and Discipline: Evaluating and Integrating Agile and Plan-Driven Methods, Proc. the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 718-719, 2004.
  27. R. Lyon and M. Evans, "Scaling up pushing scrum out of its comfort zone", Agile 2008 Conference, pp. 395-400, 2008.
  28. P. Kruchten, “Contextualizing agile software development”, Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, vol. 25, no:4, pp. 351-361, 2013.
  29. T. Dingsøyr and N. B. Moe, "Research challenges in large-scale agile software development", ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 38-39, 2013.
  30. K. Conboy and B. Fitzgerald, "The views of experts on the current state of agile method tailoring", IFIP International Working Conference on Organizational Dynamics of Technology-Based Innovation, pp. 217-234, 2007.
  31. Project Management Institute A Guide To The Project Management Body Of Knowledge (PMBOK-Guide) - Sixth version, Pennsylvania, USA:Project Management Institute, Inc, 2017.
  32. M: Corona, “ITIL 4, IT Service Management and Agile”, Axelos, 2019, [Online]. Available: https://www.axelos.com/case-studies-and-white-papers/itil-4-it-service-management-and-agile.
  33. J. Lainhart, “Introducing COBIT 2019: The Motivation for the Update”, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://www.isaca.org/resources/news-and-trends/newsletters/cobit-focus/2018/introducing-cobit-2019-the-motivation-for-the-update
  34. N. Ozkan, “Imperfections Underlying the Manifesto for Agile Software Development”, 1st International Informatics and Software Engineering Conference (UBMYK), 2019.
  35. N. Ozkan, A.K. Tarhan, “Investigating Causes of Scalability Challenges in Agile Software Development from a Design Perspective”, 1st International Informatics and Software Engineering Conference (UBMYK), 2019.
  36. A. C. Amorim, M. M. da Silva, R. Pereira and M. Gonçalves, “Using agile methodologies for adopting COBIT”, Information Systems, 101496, 2020.
  37. N. Ozkan, “People Management Issues in Scrum from COBIT Perspective”, the Workshop on Alternative Workforces for Software Engineering (WAWSE), pp. 54, 2015.
  38. C. Montenegro, and R. Arévalo, “Software development governance for VSE-SCRUM teams: Model and evaluation in a developing country”, International Conference on Software Engineering and Information Management, pp. 1-5, 2018.
  39. N. Ozkan and C. Kucuk, “Integrating Project Related Concepts with the Core of Scrum. International Management Conference, pp. 221-230, 2017.
  40. N. Zabkar and V. Mahnic, "Using COBIT indicators for measuring Scrum-based software development", WSEAS Transactions on Computers, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 1605-1617, 2008.
  41. A. Przybyłek, W. Kowalski, Utilizing online collaborative games to facilitate Agile Software Development, Proceedings of the 2018 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 15, pp. 811–815, 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2018F347.