ABSTRACT
How integrating DFSS into agile software development can help address the human aspects of these processes A German university of applied sciences with about 5,500 students needed new software due to COVID-19-related laws and decrees that required universities to perform contact tracking in case of potential COVID-19 exposure. Agile is a software development philosophy based on using self-organized teams.2 The goal of agile is to develop a basic working version of the software quickly, and continuously improve the software and add more features in accordance with customer or stakeholder wishes.3 Unlike many other software development methods, agile does not have predefined stages or documents4 and is ideally suited to coping with evolving and changing stakeholder requirements.5 One advantage of agile is discovering software design flaws quicker than classic stage-based software development models.6 Finding design flaws quickly is advantageous because fixing the software design late in the project is costly and time consuming. The problem statement was a verbal "digitize contact tracking," and there were frequent attempts to expand the project to include additional objectives such as ensuring people maintained social distancing, registering students for study spaces and improving carbon dioxide monitoring. Leveraging DFSS While agile is well suited to software development, it is less suited to dealing with many of the organizational problems that were encountered. [...]future projects would benefit from integrating a DFSS framework into such projects.
ABSTRACT
PurposeThis paper aims to focus on impact integrity in investment decision-making – an under-researched yet important topic – as a means for optimising investor contributions to sustainable development outcomes, including achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs).Design/methodology/approachThis conceptual paper adopts a two-step approach. First, this paper reviews existing “responsible” investment strategies and products used in practice and highlight their shortcomings in terms of optimising sustainable development outcomes. Second, drawing from the minimal standards theory, this study explores how emerging impact management practices may strengthen impact integrity in investment decision-making and mitigate shortcomings in existing “responsible” investment approaches to increase their contribution to sustainable development outcomes.FindingsCurrent “responsible” investment approaches often do not optimise sustainable development outcomes and may facilitate “impact washing”. The theoretically grounded framework demonstrates standardised impact management practices based on a bounded flexibility approach – adaptable to different contexts within limits and assessed by skilled analysts – along with incorporating shared language and conventions supported by appropriate accountability mechanisms that can be used to mitigate shortcomings in current “responsible” investment approaches. The authors further propose accountability mechanisms to systematically involve stakeholders (including rightsholders) in decisions that impact them with effective grievance and reparation mechanisms. Such an approach, the authors argue will strengthen impact integrity and the capacity of investments to optimise contributions to sustainable development outcomes.Practical implicationsThe findings have implications for the ability of investment markets to optimise their contributions to sustainable development and the SDGs.Social implicationsBy highlighting shortcomings in current “responsible” investment approaches and focussing on strengthening impact integrity in investment decision-making through standardised impact management practices, the findings enhance the capacity of investment markets to contribute positively to sustainable development and the SDGs.Originality/valueDespite its importance, impact integrity in investment decision-making is severely under-researched with little academic attention. This paper fills this void.