Although Agile methodologies can be seen as a means to an end, a number of approaches have been developed to quantify them.

The Agility Index Measurements (AIM) rates projects according to a group of factors.

A feature of the same name, the Agility Measurement Index, measures the development process against five dimensions of a software project: duration, level of risk, innovation, effort and interactivity.

Other approaches are based on measurable goals.

Developments based on fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic suggest that as a measure of the agility of a project, its speed of development can be used.

There are approaches for self-assessment of one team against whether and to what extent it uses Agile methodologies (Nokia test, Karlskrona test, 42 points test).

Despite the evaluation attempts described above, their practical application is still to be evaluated. Further details can be found on the CSIAC ROI

Agile Experience and acceptance

One of the earliest studies to show higher profits and improvements in business productivity using Agile methods was conducted by Shine Technologies from November 2002 to January 2003. In a similar study conducted in 2006 by Scott Ambler, Agile Methodology trainer at IBM Rational's Methods Groupe reported the same benefits. Others argue that Agile development methods are still far too advanced to require a broad academic analysis of their success.

Applicability of Agile methodologies

Large-scale Agile development in the software industry continues to be an active research area.

Agile methodologies are also widely considered to be more appropriate for certain types of environments, including small teams of experts.

They have seen a positive attitude in Europe in the field of embedded systems in recent years.

Some of the things that can negatively affect the success of a project are:

Large-scale R&D efforts (> 20 developers), although there are descriptions of scaling strategies and evidence of applicability to some large-scale projects.

Distributed development (geographically divided teams. Strategies in "Bridging the Distance" and "Using an Agile Software Process with Offshore Development" are described.

Forced incorporation of Agile methods into the team.

Critical systems where failure is not an option (eg air traffic management software).

The early successes, challenges and limitations of adopting Agile methods in a large organization are documented. Kanban or Scrum development framework are recommended.

Regarding "Agile methodology," Michael Hackett, senior vice president of LogiGear Corporation, states: "Agile teams must have experience, good communication skills, intercultural understanding, trust and understanding between groups and among their members."

Agile methods are widely used to develop software products and some of them use certain features of software (such as object technology, for example. However, these techniques can be applied to the development of non-software products such as computers, motor vehicles, medical devices, food, clothing, etc.

Risk analysis can also be used to choose between agile or value-driven and plan-driven methods. Barry Boehm and Richard Turner argue that each part of the spectrum has its own "territory" of certain applicability.

Criticisms of Agile methodologies

Agile methodologies may be ineffective in large organizations and in some types of projects (see point "Applicability"). It is best used for developing and inconsistent projects. Many organizations believe that Agile methodologies are far too advanced and adopt a hybrid option that mixes elements of Agile and planning approaches.

Agile has also been criticized by many observers as a caprice of management - a term used to characterize a change in philosophy or operations performed by an enterprise or institution. This term is subjective and tends to be used in a negative sense, since it means that this change is applied only because it is 'modern' in the management environment at the time, and not necessarily due to any real need for organizational change. Experience has shown that since basic philosophy is no longer 'popular', it will be replaced by the most recent 'popular' ideas, in the same way as the previous idea.