The results suggest that when a team is collecting metrics, it does not collect only one. For example the team who measured the “business value delivered” metric they also measured every other metric provided apart from the first two. In addition, although the function points metric is a traditional one, teams who collected it also collected agile metrics. Finally, correlation was used to test the relationship between project success and the different metrics, the results showed that there is a positive significant relationship between project success and the following metrics: Team velocity, , rs =.36, ( p <0.01) Business value delivered, , rs =.40, ( p <0.01) Running testing Features, , rs=.23, ( p <0.05) Defect count after testing, rs=.31, ( p <0.01) Number of test cases, rs=.22, ( p <0.05) There was no other significant relationship with the other metrics. Project Success Factors The survey asked about project success, therefore it might be useful to cross tab this question and see which factors made a project succeed in the respondents opinion. Out of the 53 projects that were definitely successful, the factors with 60% or over will be considered here: 72% had teams of 10 people or less (small team size) 77% always or often measured customer satisfaction (frequent customer satisfaction measure) (supported by correlation results) 79% had high or very high code quality (high code quality) (supported by correlation results) 78% performed retrospective after each iteration (performing retrospectives after each iteration) 66% had the whole team participate in the retrospective (having the whole team participating in the retrospective) (supported by correlation results) 88% reported that everybody can have their say in the retrospective (team contribution retrospective) (supported by correlation results) 64% manually collected metrics (collecting metrics) 60% never measured OR/I (choosing the needed metrics for the project)
The results suggest that when a team is collecting metrics, it does not collect only one. For example the team who measured the “business value delivered” metric they also measured every other metric provided apart from the first two. In addition, although the function points metric is a traditional one, teams who collected it also collected agile metrics. Finally, correlation was used to test the relationship between project success and the different metrics, the results showed that there is a positive significant relationship between project success and the following metrics: Team velocity, , rs =.36, ( p <0.01) Business value delivered, , rs =.40, ( p <0.01) Running testing Features, , rs=.23, ( p <0.05) Defect count after testing, rs=.31, ( p <0.01) Number of test cases, rs=.22, ( p <0.05) There was no other significant relationship with the other metrics. Project Success Factors The survey asked about project success, therefore it might be useful to cross tab this question and see which factors made a project succeed in the respondents opinion. Out of the 53 projects that were definitely successful, the factors with 60% or over will be considered here: 72% had teams of 10 people or less (small team size) 77% always or often measured customer satisfaction (frequent customer satisfaction measure) (supported by correlation results) 79% had high or very high code quality (high code quality) (supported by correlation results) 78% performed retrospective after each iteration (performing retrospectives after each iteration) 66% had the whole team participate in the retrospective (having the whole team participating in the retrospective) (supported by correlation results) 88% reported that everybody can have their say in the retrospective (team contribution retrospective) (supported by correlation results) 64% manually collected metrics (collecting metrics) 60% never measured OR/I (choosing the needed metrics for the project)