Quantification of agility: An experimentation in an Indian electronics switches manufacturing company

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to design a tool for quantifying agility in organisations and test its practical compatibility.

Design/methodology/approach

An agile quantification tool was designed initially by referring to a 20 criteria agile model. A scoring pattern with a maximum 1,000 marks was incorporated in the agile quantification tool which was then subjected to experimentation in an Indian electronics switches manufacturing company.

Findings

A feedback session was conducted among the executives of the company to test the practical acceptability of the agile quantification tool. A statistical analysis of the study revealed that 90 per cent of their views were in favour of adopting it.

Research limitations/implications

The marks allotted against the 20 agile criteria incorporated in the agile quantification tool are not supported with research findings. This leads to the questioning of the rationale behind allotting the marks against these criteria. In order to overcome this limitation, the opinions of the executives were gathered. Their opinions revealed that the marks allotment followed in the agile quantification tool is practically compatible.

Practical implications

In order to acquire agile characteristics, modern organisations should measure the agility levels at which they operate. This agile quantification tool explained in this paper fulfils this need.

Originality/value

The agile quantification tool presented in this paper rests its foundation on the 20 criteria agile model which is well supported by the research findings reported in literature. By the virtue of its research background and practical compatibility, the agile quantification tool is considered to be highly valuable.

Citation

Vinodh, S., Sundararaj, G., Devadasan, S.R. and Rajanayagam, D. (2008), "Quantification of agility: An experimentation in an Indian electronics switches manufacturing company", Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 48-64. https://doi.org/10.1108/17260530810863334