3.1.2 The Cutter Consortium report 2008 The Cutter Consortium report entitled 'How Agile projects measure up, and what this means to you' by Mah and Lunt (2008) provides an exhaustive insight into the impact that the adoption of Agile had on the IT industry, especially when considering scalec Agile. The report analysed a database of 7,500 completed Waterfall-driver IT projects and then compared key measures (e.g. cost and time) against 20 Agile releases from five different companies. The results showed that two of the companies achieved best- in-class levels of performance from using Agile. Company 1 used a collocated extreme Programming approach (XP - see Section 14.1). Table 3.2 shows that it ran teams that were broadly the same size as industry average for this size of project. yet it achieved some very s gnificant benefits. Company 2 used a distributed Scrum approach (see Section 14.2). li wanted to er sure fast time to market for their product and therefore their team s ze was larger than the industry average. While there are significant risks with increasing team size to enable speed time to market (see Section 2.4.1), the numbers show that their Agile approach Table 3.2 Cutter Consortium - example 1 Company 1 Industry average Agile delivery Improvement (%) Cost ($m) 3.5 2.2 37 Schedule (months) 12.6 7.B 38 Defects (at QA) 242 121 50 Staff 35 35 n'a Using average project size on 500K lines of codeenabled Company 2 to implement a team significantly larger than average but also achieve significant improvement in time to market whilst delivering fewer defects and lower costs than average (see Table 3.3). Table 3.3 Cutter Consortium - example 2 Company 2 Industry average Agile delivery Improvement (%) Cost ($m) 5.5 5.2 Schedule (months) 15 6.3 58 Defects (at QA) 713 635 11 Staff 40 92 n/a Using average project size on 700K lines of code Source: Mah and Lunt (2008)