Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (66)
- Article (20)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Report (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (90)
Institute
- Informatik (90)
Publisher
- Springer (23)
- IEEE (21)
- Gesellschaft für Informatik (11)
- ACM (8)
- Elsevier (5)
- PeerJ Ltd. (2)
- RWTH Aachen (2)
- Springer Science + Business Media B.V (2)
- The Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. (2)
- Wiley-Blackwell (2)
Context: The current situation and future scenarios of the automotive domain require a new strategy to develop high quality software in a fast pace. In the automotive domain, it is assumed that a combination of agile development practices and software product lines is beneficial, in order to be capable to handle high frequency of improvements. This assumption is based on the understanding that agile methods introduce more flexibility in short development intervals. Software product lines help to manage the high amount of variants and to improve quality by reuse of software for long term development.
Goal: This study derives a better understanding of the expected benefits for a combination. Furthermore, it identifies the automotive specific challenges that prevent the adoption of agile methods within the software product line.
Method: Survey based on 16 semi structured interviews from the automotive domain, an internal workshop with 40 participants and a discussion round on ESE congress 2016. The results are analyzed by means of thematic coding.
Software startups often make assumptions about the problems and customers they are addressing as well as the market and the solutions they are developing. Testing the right assumptions early is a means to mitigate risks. Approaches such as Lean Startup foster this kind of testing by applying experimentation as part of a constant build-measure-learn feedback loop. The existing research on how software startups approach experimentation is very limited. In this study, we focus on understanding how software startups approach experimentation and identify challenges and advantages with respect to conducting experiments. To achieve this, we conducted a qualitative interview study. The initial results show that startups often spent a disproportionate amount of time focusing on creating solutions without testing critical assumptions. Main reasons are the lack of awareness, that these assumptions can be tested early and a lack of knowledge and support on how to identify, prioritize and test these assumptions. However, startups understand the need for testing risky assumptions and are open to conducting experiments.
Software and system development is complex and diverse, and a multitude of development approaches is used and combined with each other to address the manifold challenges companies face today. To study the current state of the practice and to build a sound understanding about the utility of different development approaches and their application to modern software system development, in 2016, we launched the HELENA initiative. This paper introduces the 2nd HELENA workshop and provides an overview of the current project state. In the workshop, six teams present initial findings from their regions, impulse talk are given, and further steps of the HELENA roadmap are discussed.
Context: An experiment-driven approach to software product and service development is gaining increasing attention as a way to channel limited resources to the efficient creation of customer value. In this approach, software capabilities are developed incrementally and validated in continuous experiments with stakeholders such as customers and users. The experiments provide factual feedback for guiding subsequent development.
Objective: This paper explores the state of the practice of experimentation in the software industry. It also identifies the key challenges and success factors that practitioners associate with the approach.
Method: A qualitative survey based on semi-structured interviews and thematic coding analysis was conducted. Ten Finnish software development companies, represented by thirteen interviewees, participated in the study.
Results: The study found that although the principles of continuous experimentation resonated with industry practitioners, the state of the practice is not yet mature. In particular, experimentation is rarely systematic and continuous. Key challenges relate to changing the organizational culture, accelerating the development cycle speed, and finding the right measures for customer value and product success. Success factors include a supportive organizational culture, deep customer and domain knowledge, and the availability of the relevant skills and tools to conduct experiments.
Conclusions: It is concluded that the major issues in moving towards continuous experimentation are on an organizational level; most significant technical challenges have been solved. An evolutionary approach is proposed as a way to transition towards experiment-driven development.
Software process improvement (SPI) has been around for decades: frameworks are proposed, success factors are studied, and experiences have been reported. However, the sheer mass of concepts, approaches, and standards published over the years overwhelms practitioners as well as researchers. What is out there? Are there new trends and emerging approaches? What are open issues? Still, we struggle to answer these questions about the current state of SPI and related research. In this article, we present results from an updated systematic mapping study to shed light on the field of SPI, to develop a big picture of the state of the art, and to draw conclusions for future research directions. An analysis of 769 publications draws a big picture of SPI-related research of the past quarter-century. Our study shows a high number of solution proposals, experience reports, and secondary studies, but only few theories and models on SPI in general. In particular, standard SPI models like CMMI and ISO/IEC 15,504 are analyzed, enhanced, and evaluated for applicability in practice, but these standards are also critically discussed, e.g., from the perspective of SPI in small to-medium-sized companies, which leads to new specialized frameworks. New and specialized frameworks account for the majority of the contributions found (approx. 38%). Furthermore, we find a growing interest in success factors (approx. 16%) to aid companies in conducting SPI and in adapting agile principles and practices for SPI (approx. 10%). Beyond these specific topics, the study results also show an increasing interest into secondary studies with the purpose of aggregating and structuring SPI-related knowledge. Finally, the present study helps directing future research by identifying under-researched topics awaiting further investigation.
Software development consists to a large extend of humanbased processes with continuously increasing demands regarding interdisciplinary team work. Understanding the dynamics of software teams can be seen as highly important to successful project execution. Hence, for future project managers, knowledge about non-technical processes in teams is significant. In this paper, we present a course unit that provides an environment in which students can learn and experience the impact of group dynamics on project performance and quality. The course unit uses the Tuckman model as theoretical framework, and borrows from controlled experiments to organize and implement its practical parts in which students then experience the effects of, e.g., time pressure, resource bottlenecks, staff turnover, loss of key personnel, and other stress factors. We provide a detailed design of the course unit to allow for implementation in further software project management courses. Furthermore, we provide experiences obtained from two instances of this unit conducted in Munich and Karlskrona with 36 graduate students. We observed students building awareness of stress factors and developing counter measures to reduce impact of those factors. Moreover, students experienced what problems occur when teams work under stress and how to form a performing team despite exceptional situations.
For decades, Software Process Improvement (SPI) programs have been implemented, inter alia, to improve quality and speed of software development. To set up, guide, and carry out SPI projects, and to measure SPI state, impact, and success, a multitude of different SPI approaches and considerable experience are available. SPI addresses many aspects ranging from individual developer skills to entire organizations. It comprises for instance the optimization of specific activities in the software lifecycle as well as the creation of organization awareness and project culture. In the course of conducting a systematic mapping study on the state-of-the-art in SPI from a general perspective, we observed Global Software Engineering (GSE) becoming a topic of interest in recent years. Therefore, in this paper, we provide a detailed investigation of those papers from the overall systematic mapping study that were classified as addressing SPI in the context of GSE. From the main study’s result set, a set of 30 papers dealing with GSE was selected for an in-depth analysis using the systematic review instrument to study the contributions and to develop an initial picture of how GSE is considered from the perspective of SPI. Our findings show the analyzed papers delivering a substantial discussion of cultural models and how such models can be used to better address and align SPI programs with multi-national environments. Furthermore, experience is shared discussing how agile approaches can be implemented in companies working at the global scale. Finally, success factors and barriers are studied to help companies implementing SPI in a GSE context.
The troubles began when Tom, the business analyst, asked the customer what he wants. The customer came up with good ideas for software features. Tom created a brilliant roadmap and defined the requirements for a new software product. Mary, the development team leader, was already eager to start developing and happy when she got the requirements. She and her team went ahead and created the software right away. Afterwards, Paul tested the software against the requirements. As soon as the software fulfilled the requirements, Linda, the product manager, deployed it to the customer. The customer did not like the software and ignored it. Ringo, the head of software development, was fired. How come? Nowadays, we have tremendous capabilities for creating nearly all kinds of software to fulfill the needs of customers. We can apply agile practices for reacting flexibly to changing requirements, we can use distributed development, open source, or other means for creating software at low cost, we can use cloud technologies for deploying software rapidly, and we can get enormous amounts of data showing us how customers actually use software products. However, the sad reality is that around 90% of products fail, and more than 60% of the features of a typical software product are rarely or never used. But there is a silver lining – an insight regarding successful features: Around 60% of the successes stem from a significant change of an initial idea. This gives us a hint on how to build the right software for users and customers.
Die Kombination von Softwareproduktlinien und agiler Softwareentwicklung in der Automobilbranche ist vielversprechend. Das Ziel ist hierbei, sowohl die Vorteile agiler Methoden wie kurze Entwicklungszyklen als auch die Vorteile systematischer Wiederverwendung wie beispielsweise das effektive Management von Varianten zu erzielen. Allerdings ist die Kombination auch mit Herausforderungen verbunden und erfordert eine geeignete Einführungs- oder Transformationsstrategie. Basierend auf Erkenntnissen einer Interviewstudie und existierenden Produktlinienentwicklungen werden Herausforderungen und Lösungsideen aufgezeigt.
Software development consists to a large extent of human-based processes with continuously increasing demands regarding interdisciplinary team work. Understanding the dynamics of software teams can be seen as highly important to successful project execution. Hence, for future project managers, knowledge about non-technical processes in teams is significant. In this paper, we present a course unit that provides an environment in which students can learn and experience the role of different communication patterns in distributed agile software development. In particular, students gain awareness about the importance of communication by experiencing the impact of limitations of communication channels and the effects on collaboration and team performance. The course unit presented uses the controlled experiment instrument to provide the basic organization of a small software project carried out in virtual teams. We provide a detailed design of the course unit to allow for implementation in further courses. Furthermore, we provide experiences obtained from implementing this course unit with 16 graduate students. We observed students struggling with technical aspects and team coordination in general, while not realizing the importance of communication channels (or their absence). Furthermore, we could show the students that lacking communication protocols impact team coordination and performance regardless of the communication channels used.
