Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

AS9100 and Agile development processes


Quality Assurance Manager
Hello all,

I am trying to see if anybody has any resource recommendations on how to reconcile Agile development processes with the AS9100 requirements. Does anyone work for an organization that uses Agile for software development and if so what should I look for in ensuring we can comply with AS9100?

Loren Ambrose

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator

You suggest that being agile is in conflict with working systematically to understand and fulfill requirements.

Perhaps you have an example?

Personally, I’ve seen no such conflict.



Quality Assurance Manager
I really would not see any conflicts either. However, our VP of Engineering insists that there are some concepts about Agile software development that do not fit neatly into AS9100.

I said that when you boil everything down, AS9100 has only ONE real Design & Development requirement and that is that ALL activities are "requirements" based and that your method of program management should not matter.

He just does not seem to be getting it.

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
I know nothing about "Agile Software Development", but I did find the following online at
The Agile Method Defined
A sprint is a period of time allocated for a particular phase of a project. Sprints are considered to be complete when the time period expires. There may be disagreements among the members of the team as to whether or not the development is satisfactory; however, there will be no more work on that particular phase of the project. The remaining phases of the project will continue to develop within their respective time frames.
That reads a lot like a conflict against AS9100 8.3.4 g)
The organization shall apply controls to the design and development process to ensure that:
a) the results to be achieved are defined;
b) reviews are conducted to evaluate the ability of the results of design and development to meet requirements;
c) verification activities are conducted to ensure that the design and development outputs meet the input requirements;
d) validation activities are conducted to ensure that the resulting products and services meet the requirements for the specified application or intended use;
e) any necessary actions are taken on problems determined during the reviews, or verification and validation activities;
f) documented information of these activities is retained;
g) progression to the next stage is authorized.
In my experience, if design development activities are allowed to proceed without general concurrence that the previous phase has been satisfactorily completed and pending items are well understood, you have a ticking time bomb in your hands. Expediency for the sake of expediency is quite stupid. And does a terrible job of risk management.

John Broomfield

Staff member
Super Moderator

Being as you’ve been working systematically to determine and fulfill requirements for sometime now, you should have a record of how long that “period of time” needs to be with some degree of confidence.



Involved In Discussions
Check out the waterfall method, ideal for projects which have definite requirements and changes not at all expected such as AS9100D, it is a sequential implementation method and can therefore implement authorization requirements after each stage in the sequence.


Quality Assurance Manager
Agile is much more prevalent in software development and has a proven track record. Our developers have stated unequivocally that there is no compromising on the use of Agile methodologies with software development. We did find some articles on reconciling the two.
Top Bottom