Refine
Document Type
- Conference proceeding (68)
- Journal article (21)
- Book chapter (2)
- Report (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (93)
Institute
- Informatik (93)
Publisher
- Springer (24)
- IEEE (22)
- Gesellschaft für Informatik (11)
- ACM (8)
- Elsevier (7)
- PeerJ Ltd. (2)
- RWTH Aachen (2)
- Springer Science + Business Media B.V (2)
- The Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. (2)
- Wiley-Blackwell (2)
The emergence of agile methods and practices has not only changed the development processes but might also have affected how companies conduct software process improvement (SPI). Through a set of complementary studies, we aim to understand how SPI has changed in times of agile software development. Specifically, we aim (a) to identify and characterize the set of publications that connect elements of agility to SPI, (b) to explore to which extent agile methods/practices have been used in the context of SPI, and (c) to understand whether the topics addressed in the literature are relevant and useful for industry professionals. To study these questions, we conducted an in-depth analysis of the literature identified in a previous mapping study, an interview study, and an analysis of the responses given by industry professionals to SPI related questions stemming from an independently conducted survey study. Regarding the first question, we identified 55 publications that focus on both SPI and agility of which 48 present and discuss how agile methods/practices are used to steer SPI initiatives. Regarding the second question, we found that the two most frequently mentioned agile methods in the context of SPI are Scrum and Extreme Programming (XP), while the most frequently mentioned agile practices are integrate often, test-first, daily meeting, pair programming, retrospective, on-site customer, and product backlog. Regarding the third question, we found that a majority of the interviewed and surveyed industry professionals see SPI as a continuous activity. They agree with the agile SPI literature that agile methods/practices play an important role in SPI activities but that the importance given to specific agile methods/practices does not always coincide with the frequency with which these methods/practices are mentioned in the literature.
Early reduction of risks in a startup or an innovation project is highly important. Appropriate means for risk reduction, such as testing business models with different kinds of experiments exist. However, deciding what to test and how to select the right test, is challenging for many startups and innovation projects. This article presents the so-called Business Experiments Navigator (BEN), a toolkit to assist startup and innovation processes. It compliments other tools such as the Business Model Canvas or the Lean Startup process. The main contribution of BEN is to bridge the gap between the riskiest assumptions of a business model and the multitude of available testing techniques by providing assumption templates. The Business Experiments Navigator has been validated in several workshops. Results show that it creates awareness among the workshop participants that a business model is based on assumptions which impose risks and need to be validated. Further, users of BEN were able to identify relevant assumptions and map different kinds of assumptions to appropriate testing techniques. The process applied in the workshops, as well as the assumption templates, helped the participants understand the main concepts and transfer their learnings, to their own business ideas.
Workshops and tutorials
(2018)
The 19th International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES 2018) hosted two workshops and three tutorials. The workshops and tutorials complemented and enhanced the main conference program, offering a wider knowledge perspective around the conference topics. The topics of the two workshops were Hybrid Development Approaches in Software Systems Development (HELENA) and Managing Quality in Agile & Rapid Software Development Processes (QUaSD). The topics of the tutorials were The human factor in agile transitions – using the personas concept in agile oaching, Process Management 4.0 – Best Practices, and Domain-specific languages for specification, development, and testing of autonomous systems.
Creating new business models, products or services is challenging in fast changing unpredictable environments. Often, product teams need to make many assumptions (e.g., assumptions about future demands) that might not be true. These assumptions impose risks to the success and these risks need to be mitigated early. One of the principles of the Lean Startup approach is to identify and prioritize the riskiest assumptions in order to validate them as early as possible. This helps to avoid wasting effort and time. In the literature there are several different methods for identifying and prioritizing the riskiest assumptions reported. However, only little research exists about the practical application of these methods in practice and how to teach them. In this paper, we present and empirically analyze a workshop format that we have developed for teaching the prioritization of Lean Startup assumptions. We aim at raising the awareness for assumption thinking among the participants and teach them through group work how to prioritize assumptions. The results of the analysis of a multitude of conducted workshops show that the applied method did lead to reasonable results and accompanying learning effects. In addition, the participants got aware of assumption thinking and liked learning in a practical way.
Objective: This paper aims at getting an understanding of current problems and challenges with roadmapping processes in companies that are facing volatile markets with innovative products. It also aims at gathering ideas and attempts on how to react to those challenges.
Method: As an initial step towards the objectice a semi-structured expert interview study with a case company in the Smart Home domain was conducted. Four employees from the case company with different roles around product roadmaps have been interviewed and a content analysis of the data has been performed.
Results: The study shows a significant consensus among the interviewees about several major challenges and the necessity to change the traditional roadmapping process and format. The interviewees stated that based on their experience traditional feature-based product roadmaps are increasingly losing their benefits (such as good planning certainty) in volatile environments. Furthermore, the ability to understand customer needs and behaviors has become highly important for creating and adjusting product roadmaps. The interviewees see the need for both, sufficiently stable goals on the roadmap and flexibility with respect to products or features to be developed. To reach this target the interviewees proposed to create roadmaps based on outcome goals instead of product features. In addition, it was proposed to decrease the level of detail of the roadmaps and to emphasize the long-term view. Decisions about which feature to develop should be open as long as possible. Expected benefits of such a new way of product roadmapping are higher user centricity, a stable overall direction, more flexibility with respect to development decisions, and less breaking of commitments.
Context: Software product lines are widely used in automotive embedded software development. This software paradigm improves the quality of software variants by reuse. The combination of agile software development practices with software product lines promises a faster delivery of high quality software. However, the set up of an agile software product line is still challenging, especially in the automotive domain. Goal: This publication aims to evaluate to what extend agility fits to automotive product line engineering. Method: Based on previous work and two workshops, agility is mapped to software product line concerns. Results: This publication presents important principles of software product lines, and examines how agile approaches fit to those principles. Additionally, the principles are related to one of the four major concerns of software product line engineering: Business, Architecture, Process, and Organization. Conclusion: Agile software product line engineering is promising and can add value to existing development approaches. The identified commonalities and hindering factors need to be considered when defining a combined agile product line engineering approach.
Combining agile development and software product lines in automotive: challenges and recommendations
(2018)
Software product lines (SPLs) are used throughout the automotive industry. SPLs help to manage the large number of variants and to improve quality by reuse. In order to develop high quality software faster, agile software development (ASD) practices are introduced. From both the research and the management point of view it is still not clear how these two approaches can be combined. We derive recommendations to combine ASD and SPLs based on challenges identified for an automotive specific model. This study combines the outcome of a literature review and a qualitative interview study with 16 practitioners from the automotive domain. We evaluate the results and analyze the relationship between ASD and SPLs in the automotive domain. Furthermore, we derive recommendations to combine ASD and SPLs based on challenges identified in the automotive domain. This study identifies 86 individual challenges. Important challenges address supplier collaboration and faster software release cycles without loss of quality. The identified challenges and the derived recommendations show that the combination of ASD and SPL in the automotive industry is promising but not trivial. There is a need for an automotive-specific approach that combines ASD and SPL.
An assessment model to foster the adoption of agile software product lines in the automotive domain
(2018)
A software product line is commonly used for the software development in large automotive organizations. A strategic reuse of software is needed to handle the increasing complexity of the development and to maintain the quality of numerous software variants. However, the development process needs to be continuously adapted at a fast pace to satisfy the changing market demands. Introducing agile software development methods promise the flexibility to react on customers’ change requests and market demands to deliver high quality software. Despite this need, it is still challenging to combine agile software development and product lines. The maturity of an agile adoption is often hard to determine. Assessing the current situation regarding the combination is a first step towards a successful inclusion of agile methods into automotive software product lines. Based on an interview study with 16 participants and a literature review, we build the so-called ASPLA Model allowing self-assessments within the team to determine the current state of agile software development in combination with software product lines. The model comprises seven areas of improvement and recommends a possibility to improve the current status.
Software engineering courses have to deliver theoretical and technical knowledge and skills while establishing links to practice. However, due to course goals or resource limitations, it is not always possible or even meaningful to set up complete projects and let students work on a real piece of software. For instance, if students shall understand the impact of group dynamics on productivity, a particular software to be developed is of less interest than an environment in which students can learn about team-related phenomena. To address this issue, we use experimentation as a teaching tool in software engineering courses. Experiments help to precisely characterize and study a problem in a systematic way, to observe phenomena, and to develop and evaluate solutions. Furthermore, experiments help establishing short feedback and learning cycles, and they also allow for experiencing risk and failure scenarios in a controlled environment. In this paper, we report on three courses in which we implemented different experiments and we share our experiences and lessons learned. Using these courses, we demonstrate how to use classroom experiments, and we provide a discussion on the feasibility based on formal and informal course evaluations. This experience report thus aims to help teachers integrating small- and medium sized experiments in their courses.